What does it mean to study the past for different UK nations? Comparative analysis of history curriculum in England and Scotland using semantic analysis (Project)

In the current climate of tensions between globalisation and strengthening of national consciousness importance of historical narratives that are passed on to younger generations cannot be underestimated.The paper explores place of history as a subject in school curriculum of the two UK nations.Key documents outlining curriculum experiences and learning outcomes in the National Curriculum of England and Curriculum for Excellence in Scotland are compared using semantic analysis software Leximancer.Automated semantic analysis allows to visualise similarities and differences between two sets of documents, and to explore key messages conveyed by creators of the curriculums.The discussion is focused on implications of both approaches for the future of history as a subject.The school curriculum goes to the heart of our conception of ourselves as a civil society.We define the values and the aspirations we hold, collectively, through our choices of what to teach our children.This is why debates about the curriculum are always impassioned, always heated and always difficult (Martin Johnson, Subject to change: new thinking on the curriculum)What does it mean to study the past for different UK nations?Comparative analysis of history curriculum in England and Scotland using semantic analysis Westminster, and more interested in pursuing domestic agendas (Brisard et al, 2003) .Following devolution, the Scottish Executive has got the full political responsibility for education.From 1986 onwards the Whitehall Government gave a rapidly increasing number of powers to the Secretary of State for Education, who is the main driving force behind all major changes in compulsory education (Tomlinson, 2001) .Place of history in the National Curriculum of England and the Curriculum for Excellence in Scotland Curriculum reforms in both countries were initiated as a result of falling standards and perceived failure of educational system to prepare pupils for the real world.Debates around new National Curriculum in England took place in 2010-2014.After a series of consultations between 2011 and 2013, the new curriculum teaching started in September 2014.Distinctive features of the new curriculum include enhanced coverage of topics in mathematics and English on primary level, and more rigorous GCSE and A-Levels curriculum and examination, with English, mathematics and sciences being the main focus of the reforms (Department for Education, 2013) .A revised programme of study for history was also part of the new National Curriculum.It increased coverage of the world history, while requiring all children to be taught the essential narrative of their country's past.Teachers were given a greater level of flexibility over lesson structure.The main emphasis of the new curriculum was put on chronology, so that children could understand how key events and people link to and follow one another and how they sit in the context of Britain's history (Zaitseva, 2015, p.64) .The new curriculum was supported by many eminent UK historians, including David Starkey and Niall Ferguson, but also criticised for overwhelming quantity of the material, high level of detail and heavy focus on British history which fails to demonstrate interconnectedness of civilisations and nations (Burns, 2014) .Scotland's new Curriculum for Excellence was formally implemented in the 2010-2011 academic year, following an extended period of reflection since its first inception in 2004 (Priestley & Minty, 2013) .Transition from old 5-14 Curriculum to the new Curriculum for Excellence was seen as an opportunity to include a coherent sense of national story and national identity (Wood, 1998) .Although it was written by a