The first link seems to be the most solid proof that unionist parties like Ciudadanos use to ask for investigating the Catalan school system for indoctrination (An investigation I think could be done, as long as there's enough guarantees that it will be impartial and not a witchhunt). It was made by a syndicate that seems to be pretty much nonexistent (see https://www.ara.cat/societat/denuncia-ladoctrinament-llibres... ; yes, I know Ara is a biased source), and has been criticized (see http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20170518/422719728704/s...).

Of course, this is just an argument by authority; but if you look at the content, it's pretty clear that many of the supposed instances of bias are just factual reports that the report argues are instances of bias, but the way to eliminate that bias seems to be that it should be reminding the kids about the existence and goodness of Spain at every turn.

For example, end of page 17, the textbook says: "On 1700, the spanish king Charles II died without sons. Charles of Austria and Philip of Bourbon were the two candidates at the throne. The two sides fought in Succession War (1702-1714), which Philip won. Then, Philip V promulgated, as the new king, the Nueva Planta decrees (1716), which suppressed the laws and institutions of Catalonia, banned the use of catalan, and imposed the laws of Castille."

The report then goes to argue that "this presents the king of Spain as an unjust person that hates Catalonia".

End of page 15, start of 16, the textbook says: "Barcelona is the capital of both the autonomous community of Catalonia and of the province with the same name".

The report argues that "this presents Barcelona as the capital of Catalonia, as if it were the capital of a state, not as a city in a state with another capital" [when the textbook clearly says "Autonomous community of Catalonia"]

And on and on and on...

The second link fits into what I consider anecdote - a single case, that cannot be extrapolated to be evidence of a general case. See my other comment in this thread for a more elaborated response.

I agree that some arguments of the report don't hold water. But others are more convincing to me. Note that they analyze textbooks that are sold in stores, not stuff made by random teachers.

About the anecdote, a single case... there have been at least a couple dozen reported. Who knows how many were unreported. Even if they're kind of isolated, they show what kind of environment may exist in some places.

Personally I don't care, I don't have any stake on the matters. I don't like either side.