Presentation to Girl Scouts, for your review.

[ohiopiper]

I have timed the presentation, it will go anywhere from 30 to 40 minutes, depending on how much participation I get from the kids. I actually do have a pretty animated personality and plan to ham it up and keep the kids engaged, rather than lecture them.

I'll be submitting this to the GS leadership this week and fully expect them to tell me to shorten some sections and lengthen others. History will likely get the axe and stories get expanded.

[Salvianus]

Well done for doing this, a great organisation to support. Additionally, well done for getting some input: I hope you find it useful.

You've made an effort to use simpler words and you have structured it logically.

I teach this age group and I'd echo the issue with overall length. That said, I've seen a two hour living history talk that held the attention of five-year olds, but that did involve some dressing up, an armoury of weapons and interesting objects, particularly the "p*ss pot" and his long discussion of how that was its proper name and by convincing them that children of the period in question would be beaten severely if they spoke or fidgeted and that he would be taking the same approach.

It was only about 12 years ago, but I'm quite sure he would be stopped and kicked out of my school these days, let alone an American one, so I really can't recommend that sort of approach.

If you want to keep interest without getting arrested, try to:

Connect it to them from the start
Ask them if any of them have been to Scotland or have Scottish family, tell them they might be able to ask you harder questions or help if you get stuck;
Give them a snapshot of each section at the start, so they know where they are and why it has anything to do with them, e.g. "and then I'll tell you why Scotsmen sometimes eat lungs and then I'll tell you what object your family use every day that was invented by a Scot... and how the Scots virtually wrote the Declaration of Independence... etc".

Make them work:
Don't tell them all those facts, phrase some as questions. "What do you call someone who lives in Scotland? Well done, but it wasn't always so, nearly two thousand years ago, most of Europe was ruled by a mighty empire, called the? And when they tried to conquer Britannia, in the farthest north they met people they called the 'Caledonians', which is still another name for Scottish people. Has anyone heard of Asterix the Gaul? Well might have been a bit like the Gauls, but not so French. Later the Romans were raided by people they called 'Picts', can you say that with the 't' in it? 'Picts' and they lived in little stone forts and left strange symbols carved in stone that we can't understand. Then there were raiders from Ireland called the Scots, does anyone's family come from Ireland? Well the Sots and Irish have a lot in common ..." You get the picture;
Say they can all have 1 (or 2 with a smaller group) questions each and they have to choose carefully what they ask. Suggest their leader rewards the best question in their own way;
Teach them to say one phrase in Gaelic at the beginning and see who can remember it after each section. Reward ditto. Tell them you'll only teach them more if they beg you;
Challenge them to ask a question on Scottish History you can't answer, but that might be known, so yes to the Gaelic for a particular phrase, or who was the last Pictish king, no to how many men have been called Jock. Ask the leader to reward whoever finds the answer for next time.

Keep it even simpler:
Drop all of the factoids contested above and half of the examples. Tell them the very bare bones and if they pick up on an area in a question then expand on it. The phrase "it's a bit complicated and people still argue about it but I believe..." is your friend.

Break it up:
by having e.g. 3 of their quota of questions at the end of each section. They might not remember the first stuff by the end. Ask their own leader to call on people so they can keep track of making sure everyone getting a question.

Hope that's helpful and that it goes well: let us know.

[robbiethepiper]

Just love the idea of Scotland as a seperate island. Keep diggin lads!

[O'Callaghan]

I love that you're doing this...sounds like fun. I've not read it all yet, but right off the bat, I'd say that the section on Picts and Celts is probably not factual. I've seen several Pictish or earlier memorials, some with such detail, that it's hard not to consider them pictorial if not actual writing. I'm also not sure that the Picts went south and the Celts north, as the Pictish burial grounds are abundant just SE of Inverness. I know the reality is always more complicated... Might the Scots coming from Ireland be worth including?

The Scots were the Gaels, which he mentionned, or did you mean he forgot to say they were from Ireland? I think it was OK to leave that out, to keep it simple.

[O'Callaghan]

Pretty good overall. Probably a bit long for 7-to-8-year-olds. I know most of the Scouts I work with (11-18) would get bored after about 10 minutes. The presentation you've outlined would probably work better with Girl Scout Seniors.

In the past couple of years I've given a brief 10 minute talk to a couple of Cub Scout dens - about the same age as you're expecting - and just covered the basics of what I was wearing and how the pipes worked.

If you continue with what you have, coupla small points to consider:

• The island is Britain. The northern part is Scotland, south of Scotland lies England and Wales.
  
  
• The history of Scotland basically starts with the Romans' encounters with the Pict(i) - there hasn't been much found written before then. Along with the Picts of Northern Scotland (north of the Firth of Clyde) were the Britons, forming several Roman-influenced 'kingdoms' from the Clyde down to the Tweed. Three invasions brought: the Scots (or Scot(t)i, more specifically the Dal Riatans) from Ireland - eventually supplanting the Picts; the Anglo-Saxons from the Low Countries of northern Europe - eventually moving into the Borders area; and the Vikings from Scandinavia (modern Norway, Sweden and Denmark) - settling in the Orkneys, Shetlands and the northern coast of the island of Britain. (I checked a variety of sources for Scottish history to dertermine this info, and they all agreed with this generalization.)
  
  
• Modern usage of the term 'Gael' usually refers to anyone speaking one of the Gaelic languages. 'Celt' or 'Celtic' is usually a cultural descriptor referring to a much larger group of people from across Europe - it depends on what source you're using as to how broad a descriptor it becomes.By that token, all Gaels are Celts, but not all Celts are Gaels. Not everyone agrees with how to use the term 'Celt' these days.
  
  
• The Gaelic language comes in (mainly) three forms - Irish, Manx and Scottish. To differentiate, most people refer to Irish as Gaelic or 'Gaeilge', Manx as Manx or 'Gaelg', and Scottish as Scots Gaelic or 'Gàidhlig' (and sometimes 'Erse', though that's sometimes taken as a pejorative). 'Scots' is a different language altogether, more closely related to English, and is often referred to as 'Lallans' or 'Broad Scots'.
  
  
• The United Kingdom does not have any official languages.

All true, but a bit complicated for the kids.

Of course where you say Dal Riada or Scotii, those were the Gaels he spoke of, Dal Riada being the particular one of the five tribes of Irish Gaels that they belonged to, and Scotii being their Roman name. Gaels is probably enough info for the kids, unless they ask questions.

Where he says English rather than Anglo-Saxons I think there is a case for that too, in the interests of keeping it relatively simple.

I do think there's a problem where he uses Celts as someone separate from the Gaels, because they were Celts too. Perhaps he should have said Britons instead of Celts? It's not perfect, as Briton has other meanings too, but he is trying to keep it simple. I don't think you would call them Brythonic Celts for that age group.

[Santa Wally]

Sorry to come down on all your research and hard work.

But it is WAY too long, and complex. As I was reading it, I thought each section was a separate presentation. KEEP IT SIMPLE. Second graders can't be involved with a LECTURE, which is how it sounds as I read it.

Just introduce them to the traditional dress: kilts, ghillies, etc.

Also the bagpipes, as many of them would be somewhat familiar them already and would be interested in your demonstration. I'd suggest you only play one song after shortening up the history behind the bagpipes. Don't get too technical.

Expect the attention span of second graders to last 30 minutes at best. If you plan about 20 minutes, when you actually do it, you'll find it will be closer to 30 minutes. As you talk, they way want to ask questions which will take time as well as the chanter and bagpipe demo.

All the history, languages, invasions, etc would be just too dry to hold their attention. The Scottish clothing and bagpipes will hold their attention and they will learn and retain the most with just those 2 topics. My sister, an elementary media specialist/librarian, says that after 20 minutes of a story, second graders are ready for the story to end. The bagpipes will hold them to the end of your presentation.

If they want more about the history of Scotland, hold it for another day and time. My sister and I feel you were overly ambitious.

Have fun and they'll have fun. Good luck.

[ohiopiper]

I've just had my final consultation with the Girl Scout leadership. I presented them with my complete proposed program, including the re-writes and correction suggested here. Due to time constraints, we have agreeed to go with the explanation of Highland Dress, stories and myths (with one more added) and the bagpipes. Anything else will be addressed in a Q & A session to follow.

Better over-prepared than under-prepared.