I don't understand the Scottish primary system can someone please help

[heather1001]

Hi, I have just moved back to Scotland from the middle east where we had my son in a British school. My son started primary school in Scotland, he has gone into a P5/P6 class. The school has said he will be getting the same education as the P6/P7, I don't understand how this can work.

My concern is in the English system he was finishing his final year at primary school and doing well, but his age meant he had to go back to P6. He was doing very well at school before. And now it seems like he has gone back 2 years. He told me this morning he hasn't learnt anything yet. I know it is early days but I am so worried.

And as someone said my brother who went through the Scottish system in full went to uni at 17, I went at 18 in England. Anyway the point is, he's in the correct year. Don't listen to people who have no idea having not been through it!

I'm Scottish and have three kids at school in Scotland.

Firstly - don't try to draw direct comparisons with the English system as you're comparing apples with oranges. Cut off rates for school entry vary by 6 months - so the age groups do not match up. Year 6 is not the equivalent of P6 or P7. It's a different age group of children. Given the cut off dates, children moving from Year 6 in England might be in either P6 or P7 depending on their birthday, so don't get too caught up in being "kept back" or that sort of language. He's with the right Scottish group for his age. In fact, he is now at an advantage as an August birthday as he is in the middle of his P6 year age-wise rather than being one of the very youngest under the English system.

As for the P5/P6 class. Often schools don't have enough children for a full class of children at the same age. If you've 40 children of P6 age, that's enough for one full P6 class, 10 to 15 left over to put with either extras from P5 for a 5/6 or from P7 from a 6/7. In a composite class, children will be split into groups for English/Maths. (Just as they are in any class, to be honest). A P6 child will be expected to be working at a higher level in maths, and in reading than the P5 groups. When it comes to project work, or art, or science the teacher will expect more detail, or more paragraphs or whatever of the older kids. My eldest child was a P4 in a 4/5 class and also a P7 in a 6/7 class and did very well in both.

Next year, he'll be in P7, doing P7 work whether he's in a class with just other P7s, or in a 6/7. And he'll move up to secondary in summer 2019, when he's 12.

However it is the equivalent of P1 children aged 4+ - 5+years.

However it is the equivalent of P1 children aged 4+ - 5+years and extremely rare for children not to attend reception. As compulsory School age is the term after a child's fifth birthday this is during the Reception year and most parents continue to start children in September for a full year.

Norestformz - you do not know what you are talking about.

You are right in saying that for most children in England, reception is their first year at school.

You are also right in saying that for children in Scotland, P1 is the first year at school.

That does not mean that children starting P1 are the same age as children starting Reception, or that P1 and Reception are the same thing.

HTH.

I did t say that they are the same age. Children starting P1 are on average six months older. However that doesn't change anything. The OPs child has completed six years in primary school and would be moving to secondary at the end of this school year whereas due to the difference in School age they will need to complete an additional year in Scotland.

Bangs head off desk

You're still comparing apples and oranges. The systems are different. Intakes are different. We do 7 years at primary and 6 at secondary. Plus most children are in pre-school at 3 and 4. My son's pre-school nursery year was very similar to what my English niece was doing in Reception.

Anyway, OP's son is not being "kept back" and will statistically do much better in the middle of his cohort rather than being one of the very youngest.

You accept that Reception is equivalent to P1 (children in Reception will be age 4 years to 4 years 11 months when they start Reception and age 4 years 6 months to 5 years 6months?) so presumably you accept that Y5 is equivalent to P6 which the OPs child has completed. Yes he's younger than his Scottish peers but he's still completed the school year.

Because of the apples and pears situation, if we had moved to England, ds would have had to go back a year . As a September birthday, in Scotland he is in the young half of the year - and at 17, is now in S6, doing his Advanced Highers (which actually are worth more UCAS points than A levels ), having sat his Highers last year, his Nat 5s the year before and will be off to Uni later this year. In fact, depending on which Uni he goes to, he will still be 17 when he starts at Uni, despite having completed all 13 years of formal education (7 at Primary, 6 at Secondary - and nursery, where they started the basics of learning). (In fact, some of his friends went off to Uni after S5 as did I )

If he were in England, he'd only be in Lower 6th/Y12, having sat his GCSEs last year and would only sit his A levels next year, going to Uni in Autumn 2019.

Fuck me, how hard does it have to be.

You're assuming that all children learn the same things at the same stages. It DOESN'T MATTER that the OP's child has been in school physically longer. He's with the right group for his age. And I would wager nearly all of his P6 group had a year at pre-school too.

I don't accept any English school year is "equivalent" to any Scottish school year any more than I accept an apple is equivalent to a banana.

P1 is a cross between Reception and Y1 - more formal than Reception but less formal than Y1. As you would expect because it is the first formal year of schooling and because. Our. Education. Systems. Are. Not. The. Same.

I'm not comparing curriculum content it's simple numbers. The OPs child has completed 6 years of primary school in England and will now need to complete a further two years of Primary in Scotland ...you do the Maths unless it's too hard.

Like k2p2ktto , knocks head against table.

....but he will only have 6 years at secondary

Is it really that difficult to understand?

You're assuming he will continue in the Scottish system until the end of Secondary ...the OPs concern is about Primary not secondary .

You can’t compare school systems. It doesn’t matter how many years had been completed under the English ststem. He had not gone back a year he is in exactly the right year group for his age. If he goes back to England he will move into the year that they align to his age group.

Exactly norestformrsz - that's why I am so that you don't get it . *
*
He is in exactly the correct year for if he were to go back to England (he is fortunate as to his age and that he is in the overlap where there isn't flexibility: Scottish kids with December/January/February birthdays whose parents chose to defer them and later move to England end up being forced to miss a year).

Let me make it simple: *
*
He was in Y6. He is now in P6.
Next year he will be in P7 - in England he would've been in Y7, at secondary.
The year after he will be in S1, at secondary. In England he would be in Y8.
The year after that, he would be in S2. In England he would be in Y9.
The year after that he would be in S3. In England he would be in Y10.
The year after that, he would be in S4 and sitting his National 5s. In England he would be in Y11 and sitting his GCSEs. He could leave school at the end of this year in either system.
The year after that, he would be in S5 and sitting his Highers (assuming he is academic). In England he would be in Y12/Lower 6th and half way through the A Level Curriculum (are AS levels still sat or have they now lost their purpose?)
The year after that, he could go to a Scottish Uni, or he could do S6 and sit some more Highers: either continuing some of the other subjects he did for his Nat 5s and/or re-sitting some of the Highers he sat and/or crashing some new ones and/or doing/redoing some Nat 5s which might be required for the career/course he wants to do and/or doing some Advanced Highers. In England he would be in Y12/Upper 6th and sitting his A Levels in the subjects he started in Y11.
Assuming he is academic and wants to follow this route, age 18 he could go to Uni.

See, a direct mapping.

If he should be in P7 according to you and got moved into P7 and were then to go back to England, he would end up missing a whole year out. Although having seen examples of the English inflexibility, they would probably put him back in his "correct" year for his DoB and he'd end up having to repeat a year

prettybird is absolutely correct

I literally cannot fathom why everyone else questioning the pp do not got this!!!

You try comparing the Japanese or other systems! I’ve seen Year one kids relocate to Japan and they literally go back to nursery as they don’t start school until they’re 7. Ditto kids coming to the UK from other countries. Now they literally lose years of schooling as they’ll be places in the right year for their age - irrespective of prior schooling - and be forced to play catch-up.

I think you are right to be concerned, OP. He has gone back a year. Education levels in Scotland are lower than in England anyway. There will be huge difference between the level of his old class in an international I assume private school and a standard Scottish school. Look at private. Many follow the GCSE curriculum. And no way are NAT5s equivalent to GCSE year.

candog no no no —bangs head on table in frustration—

If he should be in P7 according to you and got moved into P7

And that's not forgetting that if the OP's son was placed according to that poster's "logic", he'd turn 11 this summer and start secondary school straight away. With a cohort who at the oldest are turning 12 around now as they've been deferred, and who at the very youngest will be 11 by the end of February this year. OP's child would be sitting National 5s at 14, alongside people who are already 16 if the were deferred or a March/April birthday. Highers in S5 at 15. Only 16 in the days before he enters S6. Then he reaches the end of S6 and he's still not had his 17th birthday and "should" be in school until he's 18. What does he do then? Apply to go back for S7?

no way are NAT5s equivalent to GCSE year.

Wrong! The Association of Colleges takes a Nat 5 A-C pass as equivalent to a GCSE pass.

www.aoc.co.uk/teaching-and-learning/study-programmes-central/english-and-maths/equivalent-qualifications

But again - apples and oranges. Children of different ages. Direct comparison very difficult. But don't let that stop you from having a pop at us thickie Scots with a crappy system churning out thickie children who would do so much better under your superior English system.

Just as well UCAS does not share Candog's preconceptions opinion - and is probably better informed than Candog

An A at Advanced Higher is worth an A* at A Level, while a B at AH is worth the same as an A at A level.

Highers are worth more than AS levels - although to be fair, the English HE/FE system is not really geared around AS levels in the way that the Scottish system is geared around Highers.

I have had children in both school systems. There is a reason why many Scottish private schools make most children take GCSEs, but get the less academic to take the easier Scottish exams.
My DC moved from a nothing special English school to a high performing Scottish school where she is one of the youngest in her year. The academic level is far lower.

Indeed Prettybird, it's a wonder that any Scottish children at all get into University, seeing as they are all being taught at such a low level and their exams are so worthless.

Especially not English Universities which are choc a block with all those GCSE brainboxes who have an enormously superior education. Better tell my friend's daughter who got into Oxbridge that she's there under false pretences and is taking a place from a superiorly educated English child.

Obviously there is good and bad in any education system. Personally I am extremely grateful that my children aren't being put through the hell that is SATS. Or the 11+. I really like that their education is broader longer, and that 5 Highers is standard with further specialisation in S6 rather than 3 A-levels over 2 years. All private schools in Scotland that I am aware of study a Scottish curriculum. The Scottish schools which offer A-levels and GCSEs are the most elite boarding schools only - Fettes, Loretto and the likes. A minute percentage of schools overall and most definitely in the minority for private schools too.

I agree k2p2k2tog

Tell that to my ds who is sitting on an unconditional to do a high tariff course I'm sure he'd be really impressed that the Nat 5s that were the foundation to his Highers were useless And the girl in the year above him who has gone off to Oxbridge (can't remember which one) on a scholarship (following in the footsteps of other recent alumnae). Or all the kids from his state school (not one of the supposedly high flying ones if you look at the raw and misleading league tables) who go off to do medicine, law, engineering, veterinary science, maths, physics, politics and international relations.....

As I say: just as well UCAS (who I presume bases its point system on statistics of whole cohorts) doesn't concur with Candog's experience !

Come to think of it, the benefit of the breadth of the Scottish system has meant that ds is able to do a crash Higher in a subject that he had dropped before Nat 5 - and is predicted to get an A in (alongside his 2 predicted As for his AHs - provided he doesn't get unconditionalitis don't expect him to as the Unis he wants are likely to offer Conditionals )