Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites.
 



       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Scottish News, Life and Society
Stevie

A Scottish education?

SUBJECT :  A « SCOTTISH EDUCATION » IN THE SCOTTISH EDUCATION SYSTEM.

We need to win the battle for the « hearts » as well as the minds of the people of Scotland.  

Every democratic country in the world, except us, uses its education system to educate its people about their homeland.  The accepted norm then becomes, for example, France is France.  

We need to educate our children at school.


We need to educate them about :

a) Scottish history (especially the clan system/the wars of independence).
b) Scottish literature/poetry(especially Robert Burns).
c) Scottish scientists/inventors(e.g. James Clark Maxwell was a major influence on Einstein)
d) Scottish cuisine(traditional recipees)
e) Scottish law
f) Scottish art/celtic art
g) Scottish/celtic/gaelic music and instruments
h) Scottish geography(including trips to the highlands). etc, etc, etc

In order to create a feeling for our homeland.

They have to « feel » Scottish from an early age.  If they don’t feel it then all our clever economic arguments will fall on deaf ears.

The SNP can demand a « Scottish » education in parliament.  If  they say no, we can make some noise and the people of Scotland would be sympathetic towards us.  


We need to create an environment that will foster a feeling of being Scots, then we can one day win.
Fidget

Scots have excelled extremely well in the world without any blinkered 'a to h' programme of 'scottishness' and will continue to do so without any interfering teach this that or the other about Scotland.  In fact, your 'a to h' programme will probably do more harm than good.
Stevie

I might venture to enquire what you know about any of the subjects listed but I already know the answer; very very little.

Not blinkered but informative and meant to be included in a national education program.

I never imagined learning about Scotland and the Scots would stop anyone doing well in the world, in fact quite the contrary.

And it'll do more good than harm... wait a minute, it won't do any harm at all.
magister ludi

I'don't often agree with fidget (do sit still!!) .....but "nail" head" & "on"  this time : I don't want to swap "the romans in britain" for "brigadoon".....
Fidget

I learned about a, b, c, d, e, f and g as a matter of course through school rather than any systematic focus.   Has it all been written out of schooling or something now?
magister ludi

Fidget wrote:
I learned about a, b, c, d, e, f and g as a matter of course through school rather than any systematic focus.   Has it all been written out of schooling or something now?



eh?


sorry, Stevie I take it back!
Stevie

Speaking as someone who : is a qualified teacher of English, science; loves history (all history); likes classic literature; loves Burns;  loves Scottish/Irish/celtic folk music (it's good and I have a reasonably knowledgeable grasp of it for your average person); a natural interest in geology/geography... I'm not talking about something I'm ignorant of.


Why the heck not include these interesting aspects of Scotland into the local education of children.
Stevie

Fidget wrote:
I learned about a, b, c, d, e, f and g as a matter of course through school rather than any systematic focus.   Has it all been written out of schooling or something now?


No you didn't.
Fidget

well I neffer! A clairvoyant schoolteatcher! Whateffer next?!
Stevie

If you think you were taught a 'Scottish' education, then you'd be the first person I've ever talked to who does.

Still, what you think you might know you don't.
Fidget

Well, I'm versed in your a-h stuff. That's enough really for schooling. Any further interest can be taken up by anybody with further interested in it.
Stevie

Really,

a) Name two of Bruce's most important commanders (there's an easy one)
b) Burns wrote a poem about a girl who died.  Who was she and what was Burns guilt in her demise?
c) What James Clark Maxwell theories helped Einstein?
d) This is a largely dead on its feet subject but could be greatly enriched with a little effort.
e) Name a major difference between Scottish and English law.  (there's another easy one)
f) Why are traditional highland tartans the colour they are?
g) Name the traditional celtic instrument and name 3 good folk bands and three good folk songs.
     In fact, define folk music.
h) Geography is taught at school.  What geography trip did you do around the highlands?

Fairly easy questions indeed.  Automatic instantaneous answers expected from someone with an inkling of knowledge.
Stevie

Taking far too long to answer.

Versed... nope.
Fidget

Sorry Headmaster, I left school a while ago, and along with it, the snapping of fingers to answer questions on demand.
Stevie

I rest my case.
Fidget

Good.

Countless up and coming youngsters will never know that they've got me to thank for that.  
Stevie

So, we have a Brit Nat who's against the idea and tried to suggest it was negative and unnecessary (saying he was reasonably well aquainted with some basic Scottish education ideas as if to justify his negativity) and knows absolutely nothing about Scotland, it's history or its culture.

He makes my argument for me.

I suppose he can Wikipedia some answers but certainly not all.

I do not claim to be a know it all by any means.  I'm saying, the Scots can benefit in many ways by knowing about themselves.
Stevie

Fidget, this is not even slightly about you personally.  Not even the mere whiff of a smidgen of a suggestion about you.

This is about something more important than you trying to score a point.

So I used you simply to illustrate the ignorance of the Scottish population as a whole about themselves as a nation.

You were an enormous help in enabling me to underscore the ignorance of the Scot about Scotland.
Ultra

Stevie wrote:
So, we have a Brit Nat who's against the idea and tried to suggest it was negative and unnecessary (saying he was reasonably well aquainted with some basic Scottish education ideas as if to justify his negativity) and knows absolutely nothing about Scotland, it's history or its culture.

He makes my argument for me.

I suppose he can Wikipedia some answers but certainly not all.

I do not claim to be a know it all by any means.  I'm saying, the Scots can benefit in many ways by knowing about themselves.


Nick Griffin made the point the other day on the news about why school children are no longer taught about British history in schools these days.

Similar point you are making  Laughing
Stevie

Scots should know about Scotland.

Kids generally know about the kings and  queens of England and it's time they knew about Scotland.

I wish to enrich their minds, every country on Earth teaches its citizens about their country's history, Scotland should do the same.

I notice it's the Brit Nats who are reacting against this idea, so I guess it's a good idea.
Dave Coull

Stevie wrote:
We need to educate our children at school. We need to educate them about :
a)    Scottish history (especially the clan system/the wars of independence).
The heyday of the clan system was in the couple of centuries AFTER the decline of the Lords of the Isles and BEFORE the clan chiefs became landlords (a process which was well under way long before the Jacobite rebellions). While not denying that knowing about clans can be moderately useful, there are far more important aspects of Scottish history, and it is really odd that you should list this as one of just two aspects of Scottish history you think should be taught.
Stevie wrote:
We need to create an environment that will foster a feeling of being Scots, then we can one day win.
This sounds like a very long drawn out process, and one I just don't consider necessary. There is due to be a referendum on independence next year. I think we can win that, and, assuming a pro-independence vote, there will then be negotiations. And of course there will be more emphasis on Scottish History in an independent Scotland. But you are saying, FIRST we have to change Scottish education, and THEN we can have independence. I say that's a very long detour in a completely un-necessary direction, and there is a more direct route available.
Stevie

The clans were only an example.

And to your second point, it won't do any harm.

What kind of Scots should we be?  We can know about ourselves (an interesting story) or be independent and be the same as we are at the moment.  Whilst it's not the most important thing in the world, it's certainly good and useful to understand who you are historically and culturally.
Fidget

Stevie wrote:
So, we have a Brit Nat who's against the idea and tried to suggest it was negative and unnecessary (saying he was reasonably well aquainted with some basic Scottish education ideas as if to justify his negativity) and knows absolutely nothing about Scotland, it's history or its culture.

He makes my argument for me.



I don't mind. It's the kids who'd be under your methologies that I'm thinking of: Lesson #84: MORE ABOUT SCOTLAND!  Lesson #111184494: EVEN MORE ABOUT SCOTLAND!
Aventinian

Re: A Scottish education?

Stevie wrote:
SUBJECT :  A « SCOTTISH EDUCATION » IN THE SCOTTISH EDUCATION SYSTEM.

We need to win the battle for the « hearts » as well as the minds of the people of Scotland.  

Every democratic country in the world, except us, uses its education system to educate its people about their homeland.  The accepted norm then becomes, for example, France is France.  


In other words, you want to use the state to teach children nationalist propaganda? Yeah, nothing remotely immoral about that.

Quote:
They have to « feel » Scottish from an early age.  If they don’t feel it then all our clever economic arguments will fall on deaf ears.


I'm glad you admit that your arguments are not convincing anyone.

Quote:
The SNP can demand a « Scottish » education in parliament.  If  they say no, we can make some noise and the people of Scotland would be sympathetic towards us.  


They really wouldn't - but maybe you can set-up a system of adult education to change their minds: maybe call them Re-education Centres or something similarly catchy?

Stevie wrote:
I notice it's the Brit Nats who are reacting against this idea, so I guess it's a good idea.


By your standards, yes, it's a great idea. Then again you, like so many of your fellow travellers, you are marked by your ignorance: you base your politics on one understanding, and it is wrong - as such, everything you draw from it will be similarly wrong.

Since you're not addressing the fundamentals of your belief system, then it's fairly pointless to try and address that which flows from them.
Fidget

Stevie wrote:


What kind of Scots should we be?  We can know about ourselves (an interesting story) or be independent and be the same as we are at the moment.  Whilst it's not the most important thing in the world, it's certainly good and useful to understand who you are historically and culturally.


Interesting question. The SNP's idea is for anybody living in scotland on the day of independence to be eligible to apply for citizenship. That's going to be a pretty mixed bag and I would assume that would mean less of a focuss on all things historically scottish to accommodate everybody who's ancestry doesn't lie in scotland.
Holebender

Why? Do our schools teach much Bengali of Chinese history at the moment? If you emigrate to Spain would you expect the education system to adapt to your culture, or do you think you would be expected to adapt to your new home?

I'm not saying anybody should assimilate to some local monoculture, I'm saying it's ridiculous to expect the education system to adapt every time someone moves in or out of an area.
Dave Coull

Stevie wrote:
The clans were only an example
In relation to teaching the History of Scotland, you gave this as just one out of two examples, fifty percent of your examples. "The clans" apparently being suggested as such an important part of the teaching of history would ring alarm bells for any real historian, because, by implication, it diminishes the time available for teaching about other things. What about, for example, religion? You know about Abbot Bernard drafting the Declaration of Arbroath, but the broader point is, throughout the middle ages, the Roman Catholic church in Scotland existed as a body with a separate jurisdiction from the church in England; and of course this separate jurisdiction continued after the Reformation, and it was a far more important reason for there being such a thing as "Scottish History" than "the clans".
Stevie wrote:
And to your second point, it won't do any harm.
There is due to be a referendum on independence next year. People will not be voting on whether they think children should be taught about "the clans", they will be voting about the future of Scotland. However, yes, in my view, the possibility of getting side-tracked into a silly battle over the "tartanisation" of education could be harmful. I don't for one minute believe that, in an independent Scotland, "the clans" ever will be a major part of the teaching of History, but talk of teaching children about "the clans" gives ammunition to opponents of independence.
Dave Coull

Holebender wrote:
I'm not saying anybody should assimilate to some local monoculture, I'm saying it's ridiculous to expect the education system to adapt every time someone moves in or out of an area.
Yes, that would be ridiculous. We certainly should have the teaching of Scottish History in schools. Just not a tartanised version of it!
Stevie

I don't see anything wrong with teaching Scots about Scotland.

Our 3 Brit Nats couldn't wait to indicate that anything being learned about Scotland either was a waste of time or propaganda.

Clearly it's a good idea.
Holebender

Teaching about Scotland would be a good thing. Teaching the tartanry and shortbread tinitus you seem to favour, Stevie, would amount to nothing more than indoctrination, propagandising even, and would not be in the best interests of our children or our country.
Rinty

will pupils in the highlands get trips to the highlands?

Why would scottish geography need to have trips to the Highlands in particular?  Is that area of the country more Scottish in it's geography?

Lets have a better understanding of Scottish history in our schools and of Scotland in general but education, IMHO, is as much about teaching young people 'how' to learn than teaching them any one perceived truth.
Fidget

Holebender wrote:
Why? Do our schools teach much Bengali of Chinese history at the moment? If you emigrate to Spain would you expect the education system to adapt to your culture, or do you think you would be expected to adapt to your new home?

I'm not saying anybody should assimilate to some local monoculture, I'm saying it's ridiculous to expect the education system to adapt every time someone moves in or out of an area.


That's the logical thought for me too. If I wanted to live in another country I'd expect it to be up to me to sort out any language barrier and I'd be going there in the first place because I already like the culture there and wanted to live there. But that is not how it's happening.
Holebender

Oh really? So our schools are now including Punjabi and Polish history and geography in the curriculum?
Stevie

Holebender wrote:
Teaching the tartanry and shortbread tinitus you seem to favour, Stevie, would amount to nothing more than indoctrination, propagandising .


It's all Scottish, but what tartanry and shortbread?

Also, the scope is enormous, interesting and untapped.

Highland kids, do they actually go into the highlands for geography lessons?

What's wrong with teaching people about their homeland?
Dave Coull

Rinty wrote:
Why would scottish geography need to have trips to the Highlands in particular?
My step-daughter has had two week-long trips to "the Highlands" as part of her state-school education, one week when she was a pupil at a Dundee primary school, and one week when she was at an Angus secondary school. I think the reason for it being "the Highlands" both times is because of attractive scenery and tourist facilities. Yes, she did learn a bit about geography, but she could also have learned about geography from a trip to Ayrshire. What concerns me is not so much that trips to "the Highlands" are already happening, but that Stevie appears to prioritise this over learning about other parts of the country.
Rinty wrote:
Is that area of the country more Scottish in it's geography?
You've seen "Braveheart" haven't you? William Wallace came from the Highlands, didn't he? Laughing
Rinty wrote:
Lets have a better understanding of Scottish history in our schools and of Scotland in general but education, IMHO, is as much about teaching young people 'how' to learn than teaching them any one perceived truth.
Agreed.
Stevie

I chose a few examples Dave, I'm certainly not limiting the possibilities.
Holebender

Stevie wrote:
what tartanry and shortbread?

It's the examples you gave; clans, field trips to the Highlands. It's all the touristy twee romantic view of what Scotland is rather than the reality. There is nothing wrong with learning about Scotland - I'm an enthusiastic supporter of the idea - but people must learn about the real Scotland, not the Brigadoon version.
mairead

For my own part, when I was at school (in the long distant past) I was taught nothing about Scotland, it's people, its language, it's history or anything else to do with Scotland.
I was however pretty well versed in all the English and French wars and great Englishmen, I learned about Magna carta, Hastings, Cromwell (though not about the bit where he invaded Scotland and Ireland) Good Queen Bess, Drake and Raleigh and of course the great King Edward, again minus his attacks on Scotland), not to mention the Great British Empire and queen Victoria.
I was brought up in a time when to be British was regarded world wide as being English, ( forunately that is slowly changing) so yes, I would think it very fair to teach Scottish Children about their own country, It's real History and it's many great achievers.
Stevie

Ah mairead, a positive voice in the wilderness.

Holebender, you really are exagerating when you suggest the highlander clan system is touristy twee romanticism.  They were a bunch of b******s to each other at times, they had a very interesting social hierarchy (including a matriarch), they are certainly more interesting than the drab 'crofter's' way of life you do hear about in geography class.  Brigadoon... yikes, you should learn a bit more about these people if you think Brigadoon is representative.

How much Robert Burns did you get at school?  It's possible you got some if your English teacher was an enthusiast otherwise nothing...  Yes, you got Shakespeare and that is a good thing but where's the balance.

If you check the list from earlier, you'll see I mentioned the wars of independence.  I suspect you should read Nigel Tranter's The Bruce Trilogy, you'll see that it's anything at all but twee and romantic.

The reality of Scotland is not necessarily what you teach in a history class (I suppose we could discuss crime, drug addiction and life on the dole but not in history).

Anyway : I wasn't at all JUST talking about history but every subject at school can have a Scottish aspect or character.  A trip to the highlands... the most beautiful part of the British isles is the highlands/islands of Scotland and many young people in big cities never even see it.  

I think there's a lack of general knowledge about Scotland here that simply underlines the lack of education about Scotland we receive.

Myself, I received no education.  Anything (however little I know) has been accumulated through personal effort and interest; it shouldn't have to be that hard or disperse but rather organised.

Twee/romantic... hardly.
Holebender

You have nothing to teach me about the wars of independence; it is one of the many areas of Scotland's history I have studied extensively. Tranter's a good writer but, ultimately, he was a novelist as much as he was an historian. As for Burns, I'm a native Doric speaker so his verse comes easily to me (his father was from Kincardineshire, as am I). Having said all that, the formal education we received and that of today's children was/is woefully inadequate when it comes to learning about our own place. I don't think any free state would tolerate the situation, and I think you're putting the cart before the horse when you say education is the route to independence. It is, to a degree, but I think independence will be required before there is any realistic hope of the education system adequately describing Scotland.

The fact is the parts you have chosen to emphasise are the twee romantic parts. You recommend a trip to the Highlands, not for its educational value but because it is "the most beautiful part of the British isles". If that's not touristy, what is it?

I am not saying an education about Scotland should be about druggies and neds on the dole - I wholeheartedly support the notion of giving youngsters positive messages about Scotland - but I am saying Scotland is a lot more than Granny's Heiland Hame and here's tae us, wha's like us! Our young people deserve a full and honest education about Scotland, not just the pretty bits and tales of derring do.
Stevie

I'm saying the young people need more than our grannie's heiland hame.

When Scotland becomes independent it would be nice if the people appreciated more fully what they have.

I still don't see where the twee/romantic attitude is coming from except as a teacher myself, I know that if you teach something you need to have a theme of interest for the kids to grab onto.

A modern teacher will find a way of making something relevant and if a teacher renders a subject twee the kids will let him/her know straight away.

It's not then the subjects that could be twee/romantic but the teacher's interpretation of the subject matter that makes it interesting or not.

Oh incidentally, Tranter is mostly  accurate but he does include some legend and some inspired guesswork and as a novelist he doesn't wander from Bruce's story.  

Moreover, this is not a 'I know more than you do' competition; it's a the kids know bug all about Scotland situation.
Aventinian

Stevie wrote:
Our 3 Brit Nats


I do hope you're not including me in that, having informed you expressly that I am not a Nationalist. Still, I find it amusing that you are using your own political beliefs as an insult. It's a bit like seeing Nick Griffin call someone a fascist...

Quote:
couldn't wait to indicate that anything being learned about Scotland either was a waste of time or propaganda.


That's not what I said or implied at all, and you know it.

Stevie wrote:
How much Robert Burns did you get at school?  It's possible you got some if your English teacher was an enthusiast otherwise nothing...  Yes, you got Shakespeare and that is a good thing but where's the balance.


If you are to 'balance' every great writer in the English language to teach to schoolchildren then they'd have around, oh, five minutes apiece for each one?

Or sorry, of course, literary merit, relevance to the subject and so forth are irrelevant aren't they? What matters is that Burns is Scottish.
mairead

It is a sad thing, but a reality, that many of today's Scots know little about their own country, whether in history, legend or achievement, and even the 'twee' part of it all is still part of Scotland in general. It all combines to make Scotland and the Scots who we are, and so many of us don't exactly know or in some cases even care about our history and heritage, cultural, economical, political, historical, romantic or legendary, or whatever. That is why I think our children should be taught more about their own land and its  people, it's past as well as it's present.
Stevie

Aventinian, you are a Brit Nat.  Not a BNP Brit Nat but you choose the construct nation of Britain in preference to the nation of Scotland and you argue vociferously for it and its institutions.

You are a de facto Brit Nat but you will find another way of justifying you're not a Brit Nat because you choose to believe that you are defending the established status quo.

The established status quo is Britain the nation, you choose that and are thus a Brit Nat however you choose to word it.

Burns wrote in Scots and it should be a relevant part of the Scottish curriculum to include Scotland's most beloved and famous poet around the world.  What song does everyone who speaks English sing at New Year?
Stevie

Re: A Scottish education?

Stevie wrote:
SUBJECT :  A « SCOTTISH EDUCATION » IN THE SCOTTISH EDUCATION SYSTEM.

In other words, you want to use the state to teach children nationalist propaganda? Yeah, nothing remotely immoral about that.


Propaganda...

The kids in Scotland have been told to sing God Save The Queen for decades; swear allegiance to the British flag (boy scouts) ; watch the BBC and STV with their inherent Brit bias.

AND they know NOTHING about the place they live in.

If teaching them about Scotland helps the SNP then they should do it but here's the rub... the SNP don't give a t**s about teaching Scottish history or Scottish anything for that matter.
Dave Coull

Scottish Government News Release 27/10/2009

History comes to life

A wealth of information about Scotland's past is now freely available through an online resource developed for the use of pupils, teachers and the wider public.

Scotland's History Online covers a range of subjects, from prehistoric through to 21st Century Scotland. With more than 200 topics that include links to over 1,000 other online sources and a wide range of interactive supporting materials, the resource could be the one of the best of its kind anywhere in the world.

Education Secretary Fiona Hyslop said:

"Scotland has a fantastic story to tell from the Early People, Wars of Independence, Renaissance, Reformation and Enlightenment through to the modern day. From innovations in the fields of medicine, science and industry through to Scotland's place in an evolving European Union, it's essential that our young people develop a strong understanding of Scottish history.

"During our Year of Homecoming and beyond, Scotland's History Online will stimulate interest in our past, present and future. Not only will this site be an outstanding resource for pupils and teachers integrated to the new Curriculum for Excellence, it will also help inform all Scots - both at home and abroad - and everyone who shares an interest in learning about our country.

"For too long Scottish history has been neglected in our schools. That's why - for the first time - learning about Scotland's history, heritage and culture is embedded within the curriculum and this new resource helps ensure schools can deliver informed, exciting and varied Scottish history teaching."

Bernard McLeary, Chief Executive of Learning and Teaching Scotland (LTS), said:

"The team at LTS, along with partners from the Heritage Education Forum, have developed a fantastic online resource that explores more than 5,000 years of Scottish history, enabling learners to develop an understanding of how Scotland has grown as a nation, as well as an appreciation of their heritage within the global community.

"In addition to the materials available freely online, teachers and learners alike can use Glow - the national school's intranet - to share best practice and collaborate together to enhance their experiences and cultivate their interest in the rich history of Scotland."

Tom Monaghan, President of the Scottish Association of History Teachers (SATH), said:

"SATH has been delighted to support the development of new online resources for the teaching of Scottish history in our schools and colleges. We hope that these resources will encourage colleagues to start local but think global when teaching young Scots about their past, present and future."

The resource is structured by time periods:

   * Early People (Prehistoric)
   * Caledonians, Picts, Britons and Romans (Ancient)
   * Wars of Independence (Medieval)
   * Medieval life (Medieval)
   * Renaissance, Mary Queen of Scots and the Reformation (Early Modern)
   * Union of the Crowns to Union of Parliaments (Early Modern)
   * Jacobites, the Clearances and Enlightenment (Early Modern)
   * Making of Industrial and urban Scotland (Modern)
   * Scotland in the 20th and 21st centuries (Modern)

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2009/10/27104101
Stevie

An interesting step in the right direction.
Aventinian

Stevie wrote:
Aventinian, you are a Brit Nat.  Not a BNP Brit Nat but you choose the construct nation of Britain in preference to the nation of Scotland and you argue vociferously for it and its institutions.


I find it amusing that you call Britain a construct nation, yet the one you 'prefer' seems to have been created by God himself on the eighth day...

I do not argue vociferously for the British state - I couldn't care less if the British state disappeared tomorrow, so long as it was replaced by something better. I argue for its institutions because they are largely good institutions - despite their formality, we have managed to fend off revolutions, uprisings, dictators and so forth for hundreds of years.

As for nations, I don't particularly prefer one to another. Indeed, I think the whole concept of nationhood is fairly silly. If you're asking me if I prefer Scotland to Britain more generally, then one includes the other - it's like asking if you prefer your father or your parents.

Quote:
You are a de facto Brit Nat but you will find another way of justifying you're not a Brit Nat because you choose to believe that you are defending the established status quo.


Criticism of one system does not amount to defence or praise of another, nor indeed does criticism of a proposed change amount to support of the status quo.

Quote:
Burns wrote in Scots and it should be a relevant part of the Scottish curriculum to include Scotland's most beloved and famous poet around the world.  What song does everyone who speaks English sing at New Year?


Shockingly enough, I quite like the poems of Burns. Where he was born is irrelevant to that. Indeed, I'd point out that I'd almost undoubtedly have more in common with, say, a writer in present-day London than an 18th century writer from Ayrshire - so quite what link I'm supposed to share with this man, I'm not entirely sure.
Stevie

Fending off revolutions since the last Jacobite revolultion in 1746 (not hundreds of years).  Dictatorship : yes, no dictators true but royalty and not a republic with the resulting class based system.

The institutions are just the same as any other country and Scotland will have those same institutions in place after independence.

You prefer and defend the status quo as I said, the status quo being Britain, therefore a default Brit Nat by definition.

I don't get the comparison between what you'd have in common with Burns and his value as a poet to  be studied.  I don't guess you have much in common with Shakespeare.
Dave Coull

Stevie wrote:
Jacobite revoultion in 1746
There was no Jacobite "revolution", no, not even an attempt at "revolution", in 1746, or 1745, or 1715, or any other year you care to name. The Jacobite rebellions were about a quarrel within the aristocratic class. A quarrel about who got to sit on the British throne in London as king of the United Kingdom. "Revolution" is a word which, nowadays, tends to mean at least an attempt at some sort of fundamental social or structural change, not a mere dynastic quarrel.
Stevie

Yes okay, civil war.
Fidget

Holebender wrote:
Oh really? So our schools are now including Punjabi and Polish history and geography in the curriculum?


I don't remember history and geography lessons being confined to Scotland when I was as school.  But that is besides the point of Stevie's thinking of scottish ancestory and stuff being at the forefront, because it won't apply to a large, and growing, number of pupils. So Stevie's idea of getting back to all things Scottish isn't going to happen.
Holebender

Fidget wrote:
Holebender wrote:
Oh really? So our schools are now including Punjabi and Polish history and geography in the curriculum?


I don't remember history and geography lessons being confined to Scotland when I was as school.  But that is besides the point of Stevie's thinking of scottish ancestory and stuff being at the forefront, because it won't apply to a large, and growing, number of pupils. So Stevie's idea of getting back to all things Scottish isn't going to happen.

That is not what you said. You said
Quote:
I would assume that would mean less of a focuss on all things historically scottish to accommodate everybody who's ancestry doesn't lie in scotland.
and
Quote:
If I wanted to live in another country I'd expect it to be up to me to sort out any language barrier and I'd be going there in the first place because I already like the culture there and wanted to live there. But that is not how it's happening.

In other words, you said the curriculum would be and is being altered to suit migrants and slanted towards their places of origin.
Holebender

Stevie wrote:
An interesting step in the right direction.


I hope you will now rethink what you said earlier, i.e.
Quote:
the SNP don't give a t**s about teaching Scottish history or Scottish anything for that matter.
mairead

There was no Jacobite revolutions or rebellions. There was  Jacobite Risings in favour of their true King and against usurpers.
Stevie

No, sorry,  having spoken with a number (and having tried to speak with the SNP education minister) they think it's entirely unimportant.
Holebender

That'll be why they put the website together then.
Stevie

Just speaking from experience.
Fidget

Holebender wrote:
Fidget wrote:
Holebender wrote:
Oh really? So our schools are now including Punjabi and Polish history and geography in the curriculum?


I don't remember history and geography lessons being confined to Scotland when I was as school.  But that is besides the point of Stevie's thinking of scottish ancestory and stuff being at the forefront, because it won't apply to a large, and growing, number of pupils. So Stevie's idea of getting back to all things Scottish isn't going to happen.

That is not what you said. You said
Quote:
I would assume that would mean less of a focuss on all things historically scottish to accommodate everybody who's ancestry doesn't lie in scotland.
and
Quote:
If I wanted to live in another country I'd expect it to be up to me to sort out any language barrier and I'd be going there in the first place because I already like the culture there and wanted to live there. But that is not how it's happening.

In other words, you said the curriculum would be and is being altered to suit migrants and slanted towards their places of origin.


No. In my words, not "in other words", I said:

Quote:
I would assume that would mean less of a focuss on all things historically scottish to accommodate everybody who's ancestry doesn't lie in scotland.


That means exactly what it says ie there will be far more pupils in schools of non scottish ancestry for any shift towards all things scottish. The more of a melting pot of ancestry there is, the less focus there will be on any one in particular.

You don't think, do you, that the SNP which models scotland on various other countries and actively supports immigration is going to turn towards an all things scottish curriculum?

and

Fidget wrote:
If I wanted to live in another country I'd expect it to be up to me to sort out any language barrier and I'd be going there in the first place because I already like the culture there and wanted to live there. But that is not how it's happening


That means exactly what is says as well. People aren't coming here for the reasons that would be mine for going to another country to live.
Holebender

So... You think US schools teach their pupils about all the countries their ancestors came from, and Australian schools teach all about the various countries of origin of their pupils' families, do you?

The UK government, we hear, hase had a policy of unrestricted immigration for the past decade or so. Most of these immigrants have moved to England; do you suppose England's schools are now changing their curricula to reflect the backgrounds of all their new pupils? Do you, in fact, have any evidence to back your assertion that Scotland's post-independence schools would water down their coverage of things Scottish (not that they cover much of that at the moment) in favour of including material from the original homelands of various migrants?
Fidget

Holebender wrote:
So... You think US schools teach their pupils about all the countries their ancestors came from, and Australian schools teach all about the various countries of origin of their pupils' families, do you?

The UK government, we hear, hase had a policy of unrestricted immigration for the past decade or so. Most of these immigrants have moved to England; do you suppose England's schools are now changing their curricula to reflect the backgrounds of all their new pupils? Do you, in fact, have any evidence to back your assertion that Scotland's post-independence schools would water down their coverage of things Scottish (not that they cover much of that at the moment) in favour of including material from the original homelands of various migrants?


You have lost sight of the point of this whole thread.  I am saying that this:

Stevie wrote:
SUBJECT :  A « SCOTTISH EDUCATION » IN THE SCOTTISH EDUCATION SYSTEM.

We need to win the battle for the « hearts » as well as the minds of the people of Scotland.  

Every democratic country in the world, except us, uses its education system to educate its people about their homeland.  The accepted norm then becomes, for example, France is France.  

We need to educate our children at school.


We need to educate them about :

a) Scottish history (especially the clan system/the wars of independence).
b) Scottish literature/poetry(especially Robert Burns).
c) Scottish scientists/inventors(e.g. James Clark Maxwell was a major influence on Einstein)
d) Scottish cuisine(traditional recipees)
e) Scottish law
f) Scottish art/celtic art
g) Scottish/celtic/gaelic music and instruments
h) Scottish geography(including trips to the highlands). etc, etc, etc

In order to create a feeling for our homeland.

They have to « feel » Scottish from an early age.  If they don’t feel it then all our clever economic arguments will fall on deaf ears.

The SNP can demand a « Scottish » education in parliament.  If  they say no, we can make some noise and the people of Scotland would be sympathetic towards us.  


We need to create an environment that will foster a feeling of being Scots, then we can one day win.


..isn't going to happen. And it isn't going to happen for reasons already stated.

And England has state schools where English is now a second language. That is one hell of a shift in curricula, is it not?
Holebender

England has state schools where English is the second language of many of the pupils. It is not the second language of the school or the curriculum, an entirely different thing. You are just trying to deflect the discussion from your earlier statement because you cannot back it up. The education system does not change curriculum every time a new migrant shows up.

As for you assertion that a more Scotland-focused education isn't going to happen because of migrants, that's just rubbish too. It may not happen, but not because of migrants; it may not happen because of Scots. I say this because the education system has been run by Scots ever since (and before) the 1707 Union and those Scots appear to have tried to systematically remove anything Scottish from our schools at every opportunity. The only way Scotland is ever likely to change this situation is by becoming independent.
Dave Coull

Fidget wrote:
England has state schools where English is now a second language
No it doesn't. That is a complete myth.
Fidget wrote:
That is one hell of a shift in curricula, is it not?
it would be if it was true, but it's not. The first language of the curricula in ALL state schools in England is English.
Braveheart

Quote:
h) Scottish geography(including trips to the highlands). etc, etc, etc


What if you live in the highlands...???

....do you not get a trip?

seems mean to me...
Braveheart

Quote:
a) Scottish history (especially the clan system/the wars of independence).
b) Scottish literature/poetry(especially Robert Burns).
c) Scottish scientists/inventors(e.g. James Clark Maxwell was a major influence on Einstein)
d) Scottish cuisine(traditional recipees)
e) Scottish law
f) Scottish art/celtic art
g) Scottish/celtic/gaelic music and instruments
h) Scottish geography(including trips to the highlands). etc, etc, etc


Stevie, why that particular set of things...?

What about

a) Scottish history (especially the growth of Democracy/the Scottish Enlightenment).

The rest of it is already taught....

Of course if you limit it to;

Quote:
a) Scottish history (especially the clan system/the wars of independence).
b) Scottish literature/poetry(especially Robert Burns).
c) Scottish scientists/inventors(e.g. James Clark Maxwell was a major influence on Einstein)
d) Scottish cuisine(traditional recipees)
e) Scottish law
f) Scottish art/celtic art
g) Scottish/celtic/gaelic music and instruments
h) Scottish geography(including trips to the highlands). etc, etc, etc


then you leave out so much what about...

Quote:
a) Scottish/UK/European/World history (emphasising the fact that we're all Jock Tamson's bairns, and the ordinary Joe gets a raw deal most places and most times).
b) Scottish/UK/European/World literature/poetry(especially Robert Burns, Shakespeare, The St James Bible and key texts from Germany, France, Italy....).
c) The Scientific Method (especially the emphasis on rational approaches to providing solutions to political and physical problems)
d) Scottish/UK/European/World cuisine(emphasising that traditional recipes everywhere are the cheap cuts that everyman can afford)
e) Comparitive legal studies (emphasising the strengths and weaknesses in the various systems of justice adopted around the world)
f) Scottish/UK/European/World art
g) Scottish/UK/European/World music and instruments
h) Scottish/UK/European geography(including trips to the highlands, the Alps, the Black Forest etc).
i) Philosophy

Now that seems like a much more rounded education for our kids. Opens their minds. Stimulates thought and gives them the tools to think for themselves instead of being brainwashed by a narrow view of history and humanity...

Do you agree?

If not, what do you think is wrong with my proposals?
Corby Boy

Scots education including histoyr, law etc.. should be taught in Scots schools for sure.

It is how its taught and context and encouraging youngsters to make up their own minds on subjects that is important.

General awareness of one's own surroundings is never a bad thing.

I would argue though, that despite the teaching of English history in Schhols down here, the average awareness of history per se is pretty limited, in my experience Smile
Fidget

Dave Coull wrote:
Fidget wrote:
England has state schools where English is now a second language
No it doesn't. That is a complete myth.
Fidget wrote:
That is one hell of a shift in curricula, is it not?
it would be if it was true, but it's not. The first language of the curricula in ALL state schools in England is English.


It is still a second language in schools where the majority of pupils do not speak English as a first language and are therefore also receiving lessons in a language second to their own. So in all, but on a piece of paper, English is a second language in schools where the majority of pupils don't speak it as their first.
Holebender

It would seem English is your second language. Try telling us what you just said in your native tongue, maybe it'll make more sense.
Stevie

Dear Braveheart,

the more the merrier; it's not an exhaustive list.

Good additions.
Dave Coull

Braveheart wrote:
what about...

Quote:
a) Scottish/UK/European/World history (emphasising the fact that we're all Jock Tamson's bairns, and the ordinary Joe gets a raw deal most places and most times).
b) Scottish/UK/European/World literature/poetry(especially Robert Burns, Shakespeare, The St James Bible and key texts from Germany, France, Italy....).
c) The Scientific Method (especially the emphasis on rational approaches to providing solutions to political and physical problems)
d) Scottish/UK/European/World cuisine(emphasising that traditional recipes everywhere are the cheap cuts that everyman can afford)
e) Comparitive legal studies (emphasising the strengths and weaknesses in the various systems of justice adopted around the world)
f) Scottish/UK/European/World art
g) Scottish/UK/European/World music and instruments
h) Scottish/UK/European geography(including trips to the highlands, the Alps, the Black Forest etc).
i) Philosophy

Now that seems like a much more rounded education for our kids. Opens their minds. Stimulates thought and gives them the tools to think for themselves instead of being brainwashed by a narrow view of history and humanity...

Do you agree?

If not, what do you think is wrong with my proposals?
While all of this does sound highly educational, and while I'm all for opening young minds up to the world's possibilities, I think one thing wrong with your proposals is just that there are only so many hours in the school day, and there are only so many school days in the school year. Also, if we are talking about primary school children, or even secondary school kids, some of that looks quite heavy. "Comparitive legal studies (emphasising the strengths and weaknesses in the various systems of justice adopted around the world)"   -   at which stage do you suggest teaching Comparative Legal Studies? Primary Four, or the first year at University?
Dave Coull

Stevie wrote:
the more the merrier; it's not an exhaustive list
Good grief. "Comparative Legal Studies" for Primary Four? It may not be exhaustive, but it looks exhausting.
Braveheart

Dave Coull wrote:
Braveheart wrote:
what about...

Quote:
a) Scottish/UK/European/World history (emphasising the fact that we're all Jock Tamson's bairns, and the ordinary Joe gets a raw deal most places and most times).
b) Scottish/UK/European/World literature/poetry(especially Robert Burns, Shakespeare, The St James Bible and key texts from Germany, France, Italy....).
c) The Scientific Method (especially the emphasis on rational approaches to providing solutions to political and physical problems)
d) Scottish/UK/European/World cuisine(emphasising that traditional recipes everywhere are the cheap cuts that everyman can afford)
e) Comparitive legal studies (emphasising the strengths and weaknesses in the various systems of justice adopted around the world)
f) Scottish/UK/European/World art
g) Scottish/UK/European/World music and instruments
h) Scottish/UK/European geography(including trips to the highlands, the Alps, the Black Forest etc).
i) Philosophy

Now that seems like a much more rounded education for our kids. Opens their minds. Stimulates thought and gives them the tools to think for themselves instead of being brainwashed by a narrow view of history and humanity...

Do you agree?

If not, what do you think is wrong with my proposals?
While all of this does sound highly educational, and while I'm all for opening young minds up to the world's possibilities, I think one thing wrong with your proposals is just that there are only so many hours in the school day, and there are only so many school days in the school year. Also, if we are talking about primary school children, or even secondary school kids, some of that looks quite heavy. "Comparitive legal studies (emphasising the strengths and weaknesses in the various systems of justice adopted around the world)"   -   at which stage do you suggest teaching Comparative Legal Studies? Primary Four, or the first year at University?


Dave
my proposals are no more complicated than Stevie's original proposals, just a bit more open minded.

And I would teach them at the stage Stevie wanted to teach them, (e.g. where he wanted Scots Law I suggested Comparative Legal Studies)....

....if that's ok with you...
Dave Coull

Braveheart wrote:
my proposals are no more complicated than Stevie's original proposals
What sort of recommendation is that? Stevie's original proposals were wildly impractical.
Braveheart wrote:
And I would teach them at the stage Stevie wanted to teach them
That's a fudge of an answer. Never mind what Stevie would or would not do. Are you, or are you not, recommending teaching Comparative Legal Studies in Primary Four?
Stevie

Dave, being a teacher I know what can and can't be happily incorporated into a school curriculum.

My own list was a relatively small inclusion but the point is not quantity but at least something.
Braveheart

Dave Coull wrote:
Braveheart wrote:
my proposals are no more complicated than Stevie's original proposals
What sort of recommendation is that? Stevie's original proposals were wildly impractical.
Braveheart wrote:
And I would teach them at the stage Stevie wanted to teach them
That's a fudge of an answer. Never mind what Stevie would or would not do. Are you, or are you not, recommending teaching Comparative Legal Studies in Primary Four?


Dave, you seem awful angry about something.

Calm down.

And no, I never mentioned Primary Four....you did...
Stevie

Dave appears angry but he's actually just a tad excited and having a whale of a time.

His blood is pumping with the thrill of the chase.

As far as his criticizing your fudge, well I love the stuff.

Actually, I've been thinking about fudge for a week now.

I know that Thornton's used to sell good fudge.  
Are they still on the go?
Dave Coull

Stevie wrote:
Thornton's used to sell good fudge.
Can't stand the stuff.
Stevie wrote:
Are they still on the go?
I'm sure I saw Thornton's fudge on display in a shop just the other day. But I didn't buy it of course.
Braveheart wrote:
I never mentioned Primary Four
That's right. You were vague re what you advocated. You gave no indication at what level of primary or secondary schooling you thought "Comparative Legal Studies" should be taught. I just mentioned P4 in order to try to get you to clarify. You still haven't.
Braveheart wrote:
Calm down
A totally pointless thing to say.
Braveheart wrote:
Dave, you seem awful angry about something
This is an illusion on your part. Nothing to do with me, it's all in  your  head. As it happens, I'm in rather a good mood at present. If I argue with you, that's just me being me. I have been argumentative for nearly seven decades now, and the chances of me changing at this late stage are probably non-existent.
magister ludi

Perhaps "comparative legal studies" is a bit over the top for primary4, but I can see no reason why morality....the whole business of right and wrong couldn't be taught in a participative, engaging and fun way.  Kids in my experience are genuinely fascinated by what is right and what is wrong.  For kids generally are defined, and define themselves as "good" or "bad"; their behaviour is defined as "good" or "bad". In games and role play when one mimics adults ( parents, teachers etc) he/she does so with the wagging finger of admonition  or the soothing words "good boy" delivered in  encouraging tones   If you think about it, after  being assigned a gender, the terms "good" & "bad" are the labels  most commonly applied to kids.
The development of morality in children is closely associated with the development of self concept and self esteem. If it could be taught exploratively rather than as a doctrine ( and there's the rub.....some bluiddy thought taliban movement would hi-jack the agenda/curriculum)....I believe it would be worth while.  Interestingly ( well to me anyway) some new research was published recently casting some doubt on the current Piagetian derived thinking about the stages of moral development.



"The findings indicate that the moral judgements of young children are influenced neither principally by outcome (as Piaget claimed) nor only by outcome and intention (as many subsequent researchers have assumed),"

"Children demonstrate surprisingly sophisticated and differentiated moral reasoning,"

http://bps-research-digest.blogsp...hildrens-moral-understanding.html
Fidget

magister ludi wrote:
Perhaps "comparative legal studies" is a bit over the top for primary4, but I can see no reason why morality....the whole business of right and wrong couldn't be taught in a participative, engaging and fun way.  


Isn't that a parental role? What's moral is highly subjective and I can see "Morality Studies" being a very messy class if schools interfere in any structured way.
Rinty

"The UK government, we hear, hase had a policy of unrestricted immigration for the past decade or so. "

No it hasnt, far from it, in fact the last decade has been a period of increasing restrictions re immigration, not the reverse.
Fidget

Rinty wrote:
"The UK government, we hear, hase had a policy of unrestricted immigration for the past decade or so. "

No it hasnt, far from it, in fact the last decade has been a period of increasing restrictions re immigration, not the reverse.


It has for anybody holding an EU passport. That means that aside from any other EU national, any EU country that decides to hold an amnesty of illegals frees all those illegals up to come here too. Happy days, eh?
Rinty

That isnt a change of policy and also involves previous governments.  There is no "unrestricted" immigration and it is a fact that this particular government has been the most restrictive of any in recent decades, rather than the opposite as you suggest.
Fidget

I really don't know where you are coming from here, but the UK Government, about ten years ago, opened up the UK to all and sundry with all them having to do was produce a passport issued by an EU country.
magister ludi

Fidget wrote:
Isn't that a parental role?


I don't disagree, and I don't wish, nor I hope did I imply, that this traditional role of the parent be "contracted out" to teachers, educators, theologians or anyone else who might have an "interest" in my children or anybody elses.  NO.

What I am suggesting is that I see merit in providing children the opportunity to explore,develop, define and redefine "right & wrong" for themselves, in the abstract.   The reality for many kids is that they have no where to do this; their experience of right and wrong is grounded in the practical realities and implications of the immediacy of reward, punishment, of approval or not, of being valued or not, of being loved or not.
Fidget

all sounds a bit dangerous to me. Imagine your kids go off to school one day and come back for you to discover that what you've said is right and wrong has been redefined!
Holebender

In many cases that would be a good thing.
magister ludi

Fidget wrote:
all sounds a bit dangerous to me. Imagine your kids go off to school one day and come back for you to discover that what you've said is right and wrong has been redefined!



You're winding me up now aren't you?

How could that be dangerous? Or, perhaps the question should be "who would find that dangerous?"

No, I disagree with you  entirely......their JOB is to question received wisdom.
Fidget

No, I'm not winding you up. I just think that classes about what's right and wrong isn't something that I think schools should be meddling with.
Stevie

Rubbish, of course schools should help young people see a sense of moral right and wrong in their actions.

If it isn't being learned at home then it helps to learn it somewhere.

In England, such classes exist and no-one complains.

Do the classes actually help social behaviour.  That's a complicated study and not something we can really judge simply by saying : "Yes, they do" or "No, they don't".

Aren't there any teachers on the site who can give their experience on this?
Fidget

Stevie wrote:
Rubbish, of course schools should help young people see a sense of moral right and wrong in their actions.

If it isn't being learned at home then it helps to learn it somewhere.

In England, such classes exist and no-one complains.

Do the classes actually help social behaviour.  That's a complicated study and not something we can really judge simply by saying : "Yes, they do" or "No, they don't".

Aren't there any teachers on the site who can give their experience on this?


I didn't say that schools play no part at all in it - of course they do as part and parcel of schooling.  But it is still fundementally a parental role that shouldn't be undermined by some institutional lesson on what is right and what is wrong.  I doubt teachers would be overly keen to take on such a role either.
Aventinian

[quote="Stevie"]Fending off revolutions since the last Jacobite revolultion in 1746 (not hundreds of years).  Dictatorship : yes, no dictators true but royalty and not a republic with the resulting class based system.

The institutions are just the same as any other country and Scotland will have those same institutions in place after independence.

Quote:
You prefer and defend the status quo as I said, the status quo being Britain, therefore a default Brit Nat by definition.


Er, no. I prefer torture to genocide, that does not mean I am pro-torture - what you're stating is a simple logical fallacy.

I do not defend the status quo - indeed, I believe there are a lot of problems in our society, politics and constitution that need to be resolved. Nor do I have any particular attachment to the British state, I simply prefer it to a nationalist Scottish state.

Quote:
I don't get the comparison between what you'd have in common with Burns and his value as a poet to  be studied.  I don't guess you have much in common with Shakespeare.


I am not the one making the argument that schoolchildren should study various writers on the basis of some supposed attachment, your nationalist chums were. Personally, I think a lot of Shakespeare's work is a bit rubbish really.
Stevie

Fidget wrote:
But it is still fundementally a parental role that shouldn't be undermined by some institutional lesson on what is right and what is wrong.  I doubt teachers would be overly keen to take on such a role either.


Of course, still rubbish, because it greatly depends on your parents (their sense of right and wrong can greatly vary; moreover divorced/separated families is becoming the norm.
Stevie

Aventinian wrote:
. Personally, I think a lot of Shakespeare's work is a bit rubbish really.


Well, nuff said.
Stevie

I am not suggesting selling off existing council housing but starting a government funded mortgage system specific to the building of new houses for the population of Scotland.

It's quite a left wing policy in some ways.
Fidget

Stevie wrote:
Fidget wrote:
But it is still fundementally a parental role that shouldn't be undermined by some institutional lesson on what is right and what is wrong.  I doubt teachers would be overly keen to take on such a role either.


Of course, still rubbish, because it greatly depends on your parents (their sense of right and wrong can greatly vary; moreover divorced/separated families is becoming the norm.


No, it is not rubbish. It is for parents to raise their children and instil the fundementals of what is right and wrong in their children. It is not for schools to decide.  And, your instant dismissal of what I'm saying as "rubbish" just goes to show exactly what I'm talking about - you being an English teacher and that. Who are you to decide what's right or wrong?
Stevie

Parents can be racist, bigoted, horrible, selfish and downright worse than all that put together.

Anyway, schools do teach social responsibility whether you like it or not and that's not a bad thing.

The 'rubbish' is from the fact you're willing to go about something you know nothing about in an education context.
Fidget

Stevie wrote:
Parents can be racist, bigoted, horrible, selfish and downright worse than all that put together.



And you of course, just couldn't possibly be any of those things.. well.. you being a teacher and all that! Again this is a perfect example of why people like you shouldn't be let loose with classes on what is right or wrong.

Stevie wrote:
Anyway, schools do teach social responsibility whether you like it or not and that's not a bad thing.


Ineed they do, which I acknowledged a few posts back.  

Yet again, you reply with a post that doesn't actually say anything at all.
mairead

Fidget, Can I ask why you always reply in an aggressive manner?
Stevie

Aggressive Brit Nat.  

Calling me racist, bigoted etc... is out of order however.

Proving to be a tad unpleasant when you scratch the surface.
Fidget

Stevie wrote:
Aggressive Brit Nat.  

Calling me racist, bigoted etc... is out of order however.

Proving to be a tad unpleasant when you scratch the surface.


Read the post properly and you'll see that in fact, I didn't call you anything - I pointed out that your status as a teacher doesn't mean you couldn't possibly be some or all of the things you rhymed off that parents can be. That is a bit different from actually calling you something.

       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Scottish News, Life and Society Page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum
Our Scotland Hit Counter Scottish Top Site - Topsites Our Scotland Forums Critical Acclaim ~ Politically Progressive Top Sites View Site Stats Scottish Politics