As a political science teacher for students in years six and seven I taught about the Middle Ages in Europe. One of the chapters in the aforementioned textbook deals with the Muslim colonisation of Spain and Portugal, from 711 to 1492. This is portrayed as an era of great human achievement, and the colonisation itself is portrayed as a positive thing. Everything that deals with this colonisation has positive undertones. Here are some short excerpts from the textbook:

Could the European colonisation of South-Africa, the USA, or New Zealand be portrayed in a similar manner? Long lists of positively-charged words and vivid narratives of all the positive things that the Europeans brought with them? About progress and civilisation, about medicine and railroads, about hospitals, books, schools, etc.? While at the same time not mentioning anything about the suffering of the indigenous populations? That’s hardly likely. That type of description would be considered to be propaganda and an insult to all the Indians, Maoris and black Africans that were killed as a result of this colonisation. Norwegian textbooks are in this case very specific:

Europeans atrocities and the indigenous suffering is something the students are taught about, anything else would be disrespectful and repression of historical facts. But not when Muslims were the colonisers and Europeans were colonised?