Is the Scottish education system failing?

[eurouk]

From talking to (not very happy) friends in Scotland, it sounds as if Highers are at a lower standard than A-levels (an A is a C / D) but many schools don't offer many choices for Advanced Highers because not a lot of pupils take them?

I realise you can go to uni in Scotland with Highers only, but doesn't this put you at a disadvantage when applying for unis in England or elsewhere?

Also, quotas for Scottish students at Scottish unis ... I've heard there are some courses for which the only Scottish students they accept are those with significant contextual flags?

So basically, if you can't get into a Scottish uni, you need to take AHs to (realistically) apply to a good uni in England. But your school may well not even offer the AH subjects you are interested in. So you are stuck between a rock and a hard place, by the sound of it?

Also aurea (sorry, not picking on you!,) you say

He is presently managing four advanced highers quite easily in sixth year.

In which case, it doesn't matter that he 'only' did six Nat 5s?

I have a lot of experience with the English, Scottish and German education systems for four children over 20 years. You need to experience other education to actually see how restrictive and absolutely dire the Scottish system is. One tiny example of it is two full years spent studying 'the Scottish role in WWII' for History higher. Scotland was part of the British army, navy and airforce, this was completely ignored. They stung it out for two full years!! My third child left knowing nothing of the sufferings of the Jewish people, nothing of Japans involvement, he didn't know who was Prime minister(s) where during the period, he knew nothing of the dam busters, the Battle of Britain that changed the course of the war etc etc. the SNPs complete obsession of independence and ignoring England's existence is damaging to our children's education and embarrasses them on a greater level when they get to Uni with other nations and have no clue at all about the 'outside' world. It's scary.

It's a topic! That's not everything that was done in Higher history. I could talk you through how anglocentric my DS's history A level was, easily.

It depends on those in charge and at the moment the SNP aren't doing a good job. Like anything though we live in hope it can be turned around.

How many English students do you think know about the Dambusters? Or the Battle of Britain?

There are plenty of problems with the Scottish education system. But this OP’s
complaint about highers is silly.

Highest are not even intended to be the same as a-levels. Higher and advanced higher are akin to AS and A-level. So complaining that an A at higher is only a C at A-level doesn’t make any sense.

What isn’t silly is complaining about the lack of broad advanced higher provision and the effects of the funding and quota issues for students hoping to go to university. The SNP have made a big mess of this stuff in all sorts of ways.

I think the Scottish system is very flexible. Our high school works alongside other local high schools, so if there's a subject you want do a higher or AH in and there's not enough pupils to warrant a class students can go to other high schools for that class, or college. There's also loads of vocational choices for those who aren't particularly academic, again in collaboration with the local colleges.

Kids take their Highers in the penultimate year of schooling. They will be aged between 17 years and a couple of months to 16 years and a couple of months when they sit their Highers depending on where their birthdays fall in the school admission intake.

A-levels and Highers are not the same and never have been. It's impossible trying to draw direct comparisons between Scottish and English/Welsh systems because of the mismatch in intake and the 6 month overlap between systems.

Most kids do 5 Highers - in "my day" that was usually English, Maths, plus 3 others, but this is now changing depending on their future plans. My eldest is on a Biomedical Science degree and didn't do H English, his Highers are in Maths, Biology, Chemistry, History and Computing. DD didn't do H maths.

We are in a large school (yearly intake of 210) and in an affluent area where most kids go onto to further education. There has never been an issue with either of my kids getting to do the Adv Highers they wanted - DS did Biology and Chemistry, DD is doing Drama and Geography this year. Both had/have unconditional offers for Uni by this point in the school year based on their Higher passes. There are also arrangements between neighbouring schools to merge students wanting to do Adv Higher if uptake is low. This is not new - I did the equivalent of Advanced Higher French in 1989 and we had two students from the local Catholic school come to join the 4 we had from our school.

Uni admission is an issue, because of the funding cap. Many Scottish kids choose not to go to English/Welsh/N Irish universities because they would have to pay fees but some do and don't have issues getting in. Some Scottish university courses ask for Advanced Highers too - DD has a friend applying for medicine at St Andrews who has been asked to get a certain grade in her Advanced Higher Biology and Chemistry, another has an offer from Glasgow for Psychology and she has been asked for a B in either of the two Advanced Highers she's doing this year.

Overall though, I am a massive fan of the idea that you get your passes in S5 and then apply to Uni the following autumn, knowing what passes you have achieved and what courses are realistic for you to apply to. Must make things a lot easier for the admissions teams too.

Yes, it's funny how many times on more 'English centred' education threads, you see people crying out for post results admissions...

Oh and don't get me wrong. There are LOTS of things which are wrong with the Scottish education system.

But the basic structure of Highers in 5th year, then apply to uni based on those results is a good one. Also agree that the final year at school gives a lot more flexibility in what you do - either Advanced Highers, more/different Highers, resits to top up grades, Nat 5s...

When I was in S6 I did 2 x Advanced Highers (or CSYS as they were called), crashed a Higher in Economics without having sat the Nat 5 equivalent, and a Standard Grade/Nat 5 in Accounting.

DS did 2 x Advanced Highers, Higher Engineering and a "unit" which is like half a Higher in Statistics. The school also offers a qualification in volunteering, and training towards getting accredited as a sports coach in S6. It's a much more flexible approach for those who choose to do a sixth year in school and is intended to bridge the gap between school and uni in a system which does not have anything like sixth form college.

I don’t recognise Dc in England taking 11 or 12 GCSEs either. Most take 9-10. I think the bigger issue is 3 year GCSEs which reduces the curriculum after year 8. So 2 years of a full secondary curriculum only.

All lnationalist or one party states teach a narrow form of “history”. It’s very dangerous!

Thanks for the detailed reply @KnittingNeedles. I also would favour the applications process to be post results and one where applicants only apply for 2, possibly 3, institutions initially; followed by rolling selection of single institutions if initially unsuccessful

The current UCAS process is not fit for purpose IMO

As someone with experience of both the Scottish and English education systems despite the earlier snide remark that I obviously don’t if I am criticising the Scottish system….

You can’t say ‘disregarding the core GCSEs, English students only get to choose 4 GCSEs too’. The ‘core’ includes subjects that make up the four Nat 5 choice subjects in Scotland. So my science-loving son did English, maths, biology, chemistry and physics and that only left one more subject to choose from all languages/arts/humanities at Nat 5 (which ARE akin to GCSEs but answers are much more prescribed than GCSEs especially in languages). I agree about the Scottish focus of some courses too, as pp mentioned deliberately ignoring the role of the whole of the uk in the world wars.

By only choosing six Nat 5s you are limited in your choice for Highers to those, unless you risk ‘crashing’ a higher by studying the subject from scratch in a year. Then you have the stupid system where you take your exams in April/May then start your next level of study for a month before the summer, before you know the results of you Nat 5 or higher exams, so students who performed unexpectantly switch subjects over the summer missing the first four weeks of study (which is immediately followed by the summer break). Much better for exams to be held a month later.

Post results applications only applies if you are not applying from S5 but once they get their unconditional offers so many students then lose all motivation for S6.

Three years GCSEs have thankfully pretty much gone.

English school children also get a narrow version of history. Awareness of other lands,cultures, beliefs, histories isn't just taught through one subject, or through school alone. English school history teaches almost nothing about Scotand, Wales, NI or the Republic.

My DS has now chosen an Africa module, and one about China and Japan at university, keen to learn beyond the confines of school English, German and US history.

Where do you only do 6 Nat 5s? My kids have all done 7 - DS has just chosen his options for S4 and he's doing Maths, English, Biology, Modern Studies, Business, RMPS, Drama. He'll probably also be offered the chance to do Applications of Maths as Nat5 which brings it to 8.

He did 9 subjects in S3 and that drops to 7 for Nat 5 in S4. Are the schools where you do 6 subjects in S4 offering a lot more in S3 then?

No one has mentioned Nat 4s here. Possibly not a MN interest.

Well, we are in the Higher Education sub-forum, where most of the chat is about Uni and Highers.

Nat 4s are very much a thing - either as a standalone qualification or as a stepping stone to Nat 5. One of DD's friends who has additional support needs didn't sit exams in S4, did her Nat 4 English and Maths in S5 (and passed) and is intending to sit Nat 5 English next month.

Assuming there is something similar in the English system for kids who for whatever reason aren't capable of GCSE? Like in the old system where there was O-level and CSE?

Not really, no.

You are correct. We are in GE forum, so a slightly odd thread all round!

HE!

A lot of areas only offer six Nat 5s as that is how the system was designed: S1-S3 was for broad general education, then S4 for six Nat 5s. You can only do six Nat 5s in S4 as that is all there is room to timetable to give the number of teaching hours required. The fact that some areas promptly ignored this shows the flaws with it were recognised from the start. It also shows how much of a postcode lottery it all is with some pupils getting the benefit of broader choice whilst others are limited to the six as designed. That postcode lottery is also shown by the pp in her privileged school where students are offered a range of advanced Highers, versus other schools where the choice is very limited.

These would be similar to GCSE grades 123/DEFG which was where CSEs slotted into GCSEs when they were introduced. They wouldn’t be relevant for Higher Education which is the page this discussion is on.

Yes, but the question was 'is the Scottish education system failing'? which is rather broad.

FWIW so a previous poster isn't taken at face value, here is the Nat 5 history spec

https://www.sqa.org.uk/files_ccc/HistoryCourseSpecN5.pdf

I can see no reference to the Scottish role in WW2. It's WW1. Students also study British history, and world and European history. Which, in all honesty, is broader than GCSE.

The article in the Herald, claiming that Scots were the best educated in Europe, referred to the population aged 25 to 65.
It was skewed by the older part of that cohort.
The SNP’s effect on Scottish education has been so dire that they actually removed us from the international league tables, to try and hide the embarrassing fact that Scotland had plummeted down the ratings.
The much vaunted free uni places for Scots students are tightly limited in number, as the SNP can’t afford to pay for every Scots student who qualifies. The universities have to take large numbers of English and overseas students to balance their books, as the amount offered by the SNP for each Scots student’s fees is inadequate.
The high school curriculum seems to be heavily influenced by the SNP too. My DDs’ history lessons consisted entirely of the wars of independence. I taught them British history at home to fill the massive gaps.

The article in the Herald, claiming that Scots were the best educated in Europe, referred to the population aged 25 to 65.

So pre-curriculum for excellence then. 🤔