Maybe it's because my ds has now gone through the system so that I've had time to work it out from experience and common sense
- and realising why there seemed to be inconsistencies
. I used to think that Y2 = P1 but then I realised that it wasn't that simple
. Both educations systems have 13 years of formal education (reception is voluntary): only one does 7 years at primary and 6 at secondary and other 6 at primary and 7 at secondary.
Both systems sit their 1st formal exams in their 11th year - GCSEs (which are the equivalent of O Levels) in Y11, Nat 5s (which are the equivalent of O Grades or Standard Grades depending on how old you are
) in S4. Both have a further 2 years of education leading on to Uni - at which point you can go to Uni in any of the UK countries (although the fees differ
) The only real difference is that technically you can go to Uni after S5 in Scotland (which I did when I went to St Andrews many many
years ago).
Ds, in the younger half of his year, was 17 when he started Uni, despite having completed S6. If he'd been in England, he'd have started formal schooling a year later and only have been going into Upper 6th/Y13.
BTW @MrsM11 - just noticed a bit in your post: the curriculum is not the same across the UK. All state schools in Scotland follow the Curriculum for Excellence. It's more a way of teaching (and learning), and has been in place now for about 10 years. Prior to its implementation, we had Standard Grades but then the National 5s replaced them and then new style Highers and Advanced Highers.
From memory (when they were introducing it and explaining it to us), at primary school it means more cross-subject learning, so eg you're "learning" English while doing a history project, and acquiring numeracy skills doing a geography project. In practice, nothing much changed at ds' primary school as that was the way that they taught already.
Can't comment on the changes at secondary as that's all he experienced. Judging by some of the complaints about some of the early exams under the new system, it was more about having learnt how to apply the knowledge rather than just rote learning it. So in Maths and Physics, the exam questions would give you a often strange scenario and you needed to apply Maths or Physics skills in order to solve it. (So I'd have been stuffed as although I got As a loooong time ago
for my Maths and Physics Highers, I was a good rote learner and crap at applied Maths
)
You'll get mixed views about the success or otherwise of CfE. My personal opinion is that the principles are sound but the implementation wasn't necessarily consistent, particularly at secondary.