Do Scotland’s school pupils learn enough about our history?

 Some people have claimed Scottish history isn’t adequately represented within the Scottish education system. We sent Ros Nash to check the facts on this issue.

As part of a Scottish parliament debate in January 2021, SNP MSP Kenneth Gibson said: “The snapshots of Scottish history now taught at National 4s and National 5s are much better than before but remain limited. Teachers select one of five topics from the wars of independence, Mary Queen of Scots and the Reformation, the Treaty of Union, migration and empire, and the Great War. It’s still desperately unambitious considering the years of learning available during a pupil’s school life. History should start at the beginning and be honest, warts and all.”

But was he right? I spoke to four history teachers at secondary schools across Scotland to find out their views. 

Adam Jamieson-Caley teaches history and politics at Thurso High School in Caithness. I asked him whether choosing one of five Scottish history topics was sufficient at National and Higher levels. 

“I would say it’s enough. It would be unfeasible to cover the entirety of the history of Scotland, so the snapshot of key periods of time within a 700 year or so period is adequate, especially if ancient history is covered in the junior phase. If nothing else, there are times historically where there would not be enough – in quality or number of sources and expertise – to draw from to create an equally robust curriculum as the topics that are currently available.”

Hugh Mcmillan taught history at Dumfries Academy for many years before giving up his post eight years ago to become a successful poet. He has worked as a supply teacher during that time and doesn’t believe studying one of five topics is enough.

“Part of the problem with history generally, no just Scottish history, is it’s pretty itsy and bitsy. The teaching of history in general is sporadic and patchy and it’s up to the teacher how to do it. So kids will learn a tiny little bit about Scottish history but not the context or background to make any meaning of it. And that great gulf of Scottish history up to the Middle Ages is massively rich, as rich as England’s. But nobody knows a single thing about it. That’s partly the fault of the way history is taught rather than the way Scottish history is taught.”

All the teachers I spoke to said that during S1-S3, schools and teachers have a lot of flexibility over which topics and which Scottish topics are covered. Adam’s school teaches the Vikings at this level, for example, as well as Stone Age Scottish history. A teacher in the central belt who asked not to be named teaches her S1 and S2 pupils a Scottish topic beginning with Skara Brae and going through to Mary Queen of Scots. 

Many people have suggested that the Highland Clearances are not covered adequately in schools, given its hugely devastating impact on the Scottish population. However, as Adam pointed out: “At both National 5 and Higher levels, with the migration and empire topic the Highland Clearances are a key piece of information in reasons for internal and external migration, so this is covered at the senior phase.” 

Although the Highland Clearances are only covered as part of one topic, migration and empire is at least one of the more popular choices. In a similar way, pupils can learn about the Jacobite Rebellions, but only if their teacher happens to choose the Treaty of Union topic. Again, this is one of the more popular choices, but not all pupils will encounter it at secondary school.

At a senior level (S4-S6) teachers choose one Scottish, one British and one international topic. Most of the teachers I spoke to believe the balance is right here.     

“We are trying to allow young people to know their place in their local, national and international society and become global citizens,” Adam said. “So to separate out the course like that allows for a fair amount of each. We alter [the topics taught] fairly regularly at both senior and junior phase to keep it fresh for ourselves as teachers and we choose them primarily due to what we consider to be the most engaging for the age and stage of the pupils in front of us.” 

Award-winning teacher William McGair has been taking history classes at Dumfries Academy for 40 years. He noticed a big shift in attitudes towards Scottish history in the mid- to late-1990s. 

“There was a growth in awareness of Scottish identity in the run up to the Blair government in 1997. But as well as this political change, I also think it boils down to [the Hollywood film] ‘Braveheart’ coming out in 1995. There was an awakening in Scottish history. And I think when we [history teachers] saw how young students responded to that story and we thought it was time to start teaching them the real story of Wallace and Bruce.”

Hugh agrees that Braveheart had a huge impact on the Scottish psyche.  

“’Braveheart’ takes a tremendous slagging for its historical inaccuracies,” Hugh said. “But I think it’s a marvellous film – it kindled the sense that Scottish history was important. Important enough to do a Hollywood feature film on. I’ve never seen such an atmosphere in a cinema, not with folk shouting and applauding. And it’s because we were being treated as important for the first time. That’s something you just don’t get in the ordinary media.

“Perhaps it’s inevitable, given we’re in this relationship with England, that Scottish history has always been the poor relation. Scottish history, like Scottish language and Scottish literature, is a political issue. Everything boils down to the constitution in terms of those topics.”

Hugh and William both suggested one important topic not currently covered at all by the curriculum is the formation of Scotland itself.  

“In the early 2000s, we [the teachers at Dumfries Academy] brought a Scottish topic into S1 based on the foundations of the four kingdoms of Scotland and how they became one country,” William said.

“So you studied Strathclyde, Dalriada and the Lothians and found out about the differences between the kingdoms, and the Stone of Destiny. It was the story of how they all merged into one. The kids quite enjoyed it. But eventually that was removed. I would think some sort of ‘where did the Scottish nation come from?’ should be taught. Because I suspect in Germany and in Russia and the US, that’s a very big deal. I don’t know if you took even some very able kids and asked them, ‘How did Scotland come about?’, they’d be able to tell you. I do think that is a missing part. Sometimes it’s almost like Scottish history didn’t exist before William Wallace.”

“My great bugbear,” Hugh told me, “is there’s a thousand years of Scottish history that’s just never covered in schools unless it’s done in S1 and S2. Scottish history has always been the poor relation. Even though the Scottish government has insisted, quite rightly, that we do Scottish history, what tends to happen at every Scottish secondary school is we just do the wars of independence over and over again until everybody’s dizzy.

“I mean it’s good that Scottish kids get a good concept of these wars of independence and the identity of Scottish nationhood and our place in the whole English-Scottish thing. But there are no bones to hang it on.

“The concept of Scottish history outside of school, if people are interested in history they get fed English history of course. I don’t think necessarily that has been a deliberate thing but because we’re outnumbered ten times to the English, every bit of media, every TV programme, books, magazines… they tend to concentrate an English history with Scottish history as a footnote.”

However, the central belt teacher believes all the main Scottish history topics are covered and that there is a good balance between Scottish, British and world history.

“Kids like learning about Scottish history. The only problem is that Scots in WW1 is a British topic that has been put into Scotland,” she said. “The issue is, we have to use Scottish examples [and] these can be hard to find. For example, [when teaching] women and the vote most of the examples are of English suffragists/suffragettes.”

The issue of adequate resources and teaching materials came up several times. 

“I don’t think teachers have sufficient resources to teach anything,” Hugh said. “I was in a school the other day doing a poetry thing. A guy wrote a history book ages ago, which is totally out of date now, but they were still using moth-eaten copies of that. So I think resources are a difficulty for them. But also resources of time. There are some really talented teachers who may want to teach early Scottish history or the Ness of Brodgar, but they basically don’t have time to develop courses.”

Many of the teachers I contacted praised primary school teachers for the huge amount of work they put in teaching young children about Scottish history. As Hugh said, “I think they do tremendously good work in pritomary schools. I think a lot of kids come from primary school knowing more history than they’re going to learn at secondary. Primary schools do a brilliant job but they do have a lot of time to concentrate on one thing.” 

With the Scottish Qualifications Authority being phased out and replaced in 2024, it’s likely the curriculum will change before too long, with potentially significant changes on the horizon once a new educational body is established.

But for now, as William pointed out, “Things have got better. And at the end of the day somebody has to make a decision. You can have criticism about the amount of Scottish history in the National courses, but I think [the education authorities] have tried their absolute best. With the SQA going, there are probably more opportunities to develop new things. But one of the great things about Scottish education is you do have a choice and it’s about the teacher’s experiences and interests.”

Comments (7)

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published.

  1. Roland says:

    of course there is much more history now than when I were a lad. Pity those kids in 3023 who will have another millennia to be examined on. it’s just not fair.

    1. Alec Lomax says:

      There’ll be humans around in 3023?

  2. SleepingDog says:

    I recently read a little bit on the idea of Big History, which takes a less human-centred view:
    Life on this planet might continue long after Scotland is gone (I hope). The generation now going through school might be young adults when the first proof of life beyond Earth is received. Perhaps this kind of cross-displinary approach could be handled across specialities in school? I think something should be done to counter the ‘end of history’ views that give such undue (indeed, egoistic) importance to the present.

  3. BSA says:

    Like all of ‘British’ history and all the popular presentation of Scottish history Braveheart presented the Scots as backward oppressed losers. Scotland was an established sophisticated mainstream European state and it was that more than anything which enabled it to resist England where Ireland and Wales could not. A major objective of Scottish history teaching should be to treat Scotland as just that, a distinctive but normal state, instead of the anarchic bloody place which was eventually saved by the inevitable civilising influence of the Union. That is how British Whig history presented things. You can see its negative influence still in Scotland’s lack of confidence and in its persistence in our treatment by the Anglo British.

  4. florian albert says:

    Going back decades, it is fairly clear that what Scottish history pupils learned in schools was haphazard. That said, this does not appear to have had a significant, negative impact on them.
    The distinctive Scottish sense of identity did not diminish.
    The future is likely to be similar to the past. There is no space in the school curriculum for a bigger role for history. If anything, the opposite. History is being subsumed into social subjects.
    If those in charge on Scottish education – the people who brought you Curriculum for Excellence – were put in charge of creating a national History curriculum, you can be certain it would be a disaster.

  5. Mrs Deirdre Budd says:

    We need to support our Primary Schools better. Teachers having to pay out of their own pocket to supply food and other resources to pupils, is not how the Education system should work. Very few children know the local history of their area, or even the local folk tales. Teaching history should begin in Primary Education and carry on through the entire Education System. Our history is part of our country and is rapidly being further subsumed into the “great UK”. How can children move forward without some knowledge of their past? History lessons should begin within local communities at primary school level and follow through the entire Educational System. We need to ensure that this is done better, with better support to local communities.

  6. Dissenter says:

    Braveheart is drivel directed by a reactionary homophobic antisemite.

    Proper Scottish history would be teaching about the sacrifice of ordinary folk to satisfy the ambitions of French speaking Norman descended aristocrats.

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.