What should Swinney do to improve Education.

[Roseformeplease]

I teach in Scotland (Secondary) and also have a DD (S4) and a DS (S6) who have been in the eye of the storm with the Curriculum for Excellence, new exams etc. I have also been involved in implementing things at school, Chair of Parent Forum when kids were at Primary. I even mark for SQA.

My school is unusual (tiny, remote secondary) with 1 teacher for most subjects. There are lots of things I would like to see happening (and one of them is an end to the SNP and talk of IndyRef2 so I am not a supporter). What would you advise him to do?

1. Get rid of units, unit tests etc. They do not match up with final exams and are a pain, plus stressful for kids. In English there were 12 separate assessment standards that have to be overtaken at N5/H (now 9) and 24 at N4.

1. Make it easier to get rid of poor teachers. My kids' school careers have suffered at various times from some pretty shocking teachers who are still being paid to fuck kids' lives up. If everyone else in every other subject can get kids through an N5, and all your pupils fail (really!) then you should not be a teacher.

1. Have a fixed number of N5s that schools have to offer. Avoid schools trying to attract kids /parents with 8/9 or 6 or whatever. Getting rid of the units would make 8 much more manageable.

1. Free schools up to let kids do things early, or stay on until 18, if that suited them. DS did some exams in S2 and S3 (2 Int2s and a Higher) but rules stopped DD from doing the same.

Anyone else?

He needs to work on bottom 20%. Re-examine exit arrangements. Beef up colleges etc.

There must be more.

Agree - my son is definitely going to do something science-y so will want to take Biology, Chemistry and Physics. If he were limited to 5 that would be it, along with Maths and English. But he also has a real aptitude for Computing. And loves History. At least with 7 options he can keep those going and if he decides after S4 that he'd really prefer to aim for a career in programming rather than medical research, that option is still open.

14 or 15 is far to young to be making those sort of decisions. It's part of the reason that other countries look to Scottish education as a good example - thing are kept more general for longer. 5 highers compared with 3 A-levels.

The narrowing of subject choices at Nat 5 is awful - our school allows six Nat 5s, so only a choice of four subjects after Maths and English. At the same age I was studying an additional seven subjects - which gave me a much wider choice of subjects for A level.

I've also been quite taken aback at the limited range of texts studied for English - I did A level in the 1980s, and by that stage we'd covered novels / plays / poetry by Orwell, Shakespeare, Dickens, EM Forster, Huxley, Beckett, Miller, Hardy, Keats, Webster, Harper Lee.

I think the recommendation (idea behind CforE) is 5 Nat 5s in S4 - they have a broad education until the end of S3. BUT if you have no idea what you want to do in the future even choosing at the end of S3 doing 5 is restrictive. Our high school do a max of 7 but that means that they start the Nat 4s in S3 - so at the end of S2 are choosing to restrict their choices to 7 subjects. (DD did 6 as she decided to drop one Nat 4 at the end of S3 as she wasn't enjoying it and start another)

I think it is unfair that different schools can offer differing amounts.
Also the first 3 years broad curriculum is too prescriptive and has too much 'dross' in it. As I understand it there isn't really enough school hours to teach all the requirements of the C for E.
I will admit the teaching was not the best (but then there is a shortage of teachers in those subjects) but the amount of computer studies, business studies etc for 3 years - which seemed to be free computer mess around time - DD was watching you tube...when the schedule is so tight you are dropping sciences/history/geography seems ridiculous.
I think that it should be more like the English system (sucks in teeth) -where they do up to 10 subjects but at a lower level and then at 15-16 do say 5 highers - then in S6 do 3 Advanced highers.

The 'Scottification' - I agree with Luna -it is scary really. Reading (especially) the social subjects curriculum in places is a bit like reading an instruction manual for subtle indoctrination. Nothing wrong with being proud to be Scottish or knowing about your heritage - and local flora or fauna in the case of biology but it should be unbiased and in context of the wider world -and it doesn't seem to be.
It is the same kind of indoctrination happening in the registration details for schools/nurseries (which comes from the Scottish government)- needing to state ethnic origin - the choices for white are -gipsy traveller, Irish, other, other British, Polish and Scottish...(no Welsh or English options...)
Then there is also a National Identity question - you can chose British, English, Northern Irish, Not disclosed, other (please state) then Scottish or Welsh...
Surely ethnic origin should be white- British if you have the option for National identity...unless the Scottish genes are vastly different from the rest of the UK...which they won't be. I think it is a subtle 'othering' of being Scottish. It is creepy.

Back to CforE - it is a lovely idea but not sure how it can work in a large class - with children with different interests. I don't see how it can work.
I know of a preschool setting that were pulled up for having 'topics' - being not child led enough, the children (30) not choosing the topics (ignoring the fact they used the interest of mainly ONE child as a basis for eg recognising numbers - not the real eg but they had an interest in firemen so the 'work' was based on firemen)
On the other hand they have set things they are supposed to cover - how do you ensure all the children have been exposed/learned these things unless you focus on them - as a topic.
And you are depending on young children having other interests - and as preschoolers their interests will come from home ...so children with less mc/privileged backgrounds are likely to have had less exposure to other interests. (Might go some way to explaining the widening attainment gap)

At primary they also have set things they have to cover - but again it is child led. Which has its own problems. It is either prescriptive or not - you can't have both.
Also the need for 2 modern languages from P1. Fine if you have the staff and resources to teach those subjects - can afford to get people in and to train the staff but with the council tax freeze and councils being short of money where does that money come from?
I think the whole thing is a fuck up - a mess. Everyone seems to have their own idea what the CforE is. There has been an absence of clear practical direction leading to effective planning and implementation - and lack of funding.
Sorry (massive) rant over...

Only 6 subjects is depressing me already for my youngest kid. And the draw a poster style of mixed ability teaching that I know lies ahead at high school for a child with the potential to do much more. The other side of it is my one that struggled would have done better with targeted English teaching which repeated the basics till they stuck. Instead the strategy is to just give more time in exams which did not help longterm!

In the 4 years up to his Nat 5s, in English ds studied that I know of: Robert Louis Stevenson (Kidnapped); Shakespeare (A Misummer's Night Dream, Two Gentlemen of Verona, Macbeth and at least one sonnet); Steinbeck (Of Mice and Men); Harper Lee (To Kill A Mockingbird); various Carol Ann Duffy and Norman MacCaig poems; Ken Kesey (One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest); a bit of Beowulf; some Dickens (not sure which one and it might just have been peripheral to one of the Carol Ann Duffy poems)....and probably some other authors that he didn't mention.

No idea yet what he's studying this year for his Higher as he refuses to tell me (I'll have to wait until he starts talking to me about what he finds interesting about the texts...) although I suspect Arthur Miller might feature. I'm hoping he'll be studying Hamlet (I love Hamlet ).

I'm very happy with the range of what he's studied/studying and think it compares favourably with what I studied all those many ) years ago for my O Grade/Higher (English was my strongest subject and I won the English prize by a country mile and am very much my English-teacher-mother's daughter )

Now whether that was thanks to his scarily intense teacher or the curriculum, I don't know

Nowadays they have to do one bit that I didn't have to do but which I think is a good addition as it's a worthwhile skill (although for some kids it's a real challenge for them), which is the public speaking element.

Like others on this thread, I'm unhappy at the apparent constriction of choices prior to Highers. Ds is fortunate that he is at a school that allows 8 Nat 5s for those that are capable, which means that he had a full choice for his 5 Highers.

I know when I sat my O Grades (8 too), I found it difficult to narrow down as I wasn't sure what I wanted to do and liked both Arts and Sciences - so quite deliberately chose 3 Arts (English, French, Latin) and 3 Sciences (Maths, Physics, Chemistry) for my Highers (but I acknowledge that 6 Highers is unusual for state schools now)

I do fear that the strength of the Scottish broad-based education is being damaged with so many schools restricting choice. I understand that some of the thinking was increasing the level of the Nat 5 so that the jump to Higher wasn't so pronounced - but how do some schools still seem to manage it but not others?

As I understand it if a school commits to maintaining more subjects in nat5 year they do the naughty thing and start the courses earlier ( in S3) when other CfE compliant schools are still at the BGE stage.

The local school here is also very much into allowing pupils to drift along and take a mish mash of levels in an academic year, hence precluding some people from competitive university courses which use the ability to sit your highers in one go as a marker.

I agree - most of the schools that I am aware of that allow 8 Nat 5s do make their choices at the end of S2.

Although given that at ds' school, there are 8 columns and the 8 BGE areas spread across the 8 columns, then they are still following the BGE (I'll caveat that by saying that because ds wanted to Physics, Chemistry and PE - an unusual combination - all the "expressive arts" options were in those same three columns so he ended up doing Computing Science as his 8th subject)

The school was also audited for BGE compliance last year and passed, so it must be possible. So it goes back again to lack of clear guidelines and consistency in implementation

And you're absolutely right about some schools not serving their kids well by not making it clear to them that for competitive subjects/Unis, it's your ability to get good results from a single diet of exams that is considered.

But is that CfE or is that poor guidance in the schools? I remember my mum, years ago, getting annoyed at the habit that some schools were getting into of studying Higher English over 2 years. She didn't feel it added anything - and that pupils being put forward for exam who then failed it were then outwith the school system and it was going to be even more difficult for them to get it.

Also the first 3 years broad curriculum is too prescriptive and has too much 'dross' in it.

It's certainly changed a lot since my time in S1 and S2 in the mid 80s. My S2 child has 2 x 50 minutes per week of Music which is an awful lot for a child who cannot carry a tune in a bucket and has zero interest in listening or playing to music. He describes his music lessons as "torture". He also has 2 x 50 minutes of drama and 2 x 50 minutes of PHSE - one period of which it has been decided that they do "masterclasses" in various subjects and despite not choosing it as any of his preferences, son has been put into a 9 week songwriting block. So until November he has 3 x 50 minutes of music per week and is thoroughly miserable about it.

In my day (I sound SO OLD) we had 40 minutes a week of music, a double period of Home Ec, double Art and I barely remember doing drama at all. I'd much rather he was doing less drama and music, and an additional period a week of Business Studies or Computing as he only gets 50 minutes a week of those.

On the ethnic origin forms, we usually tick British. I'm Scottish, husband is English, 2 kids were born in England and 1 in Scotland. Just had a form home from school and just because I was feeling arsey I ticked the "parent refused to answer" box.

That's a lot of Expressive Arts, Luna, how do they fit everything else in?! I think in my kids' school they rotate some subjects every term so across the year they get some teaching in every aspect.

I agree with PPs about universities looking for 4-5 Highers in one sitting - there doesn't seem to be as much focus on this as there was during my secondary years in the 80s, and I think some kids might be being short-changed as a result.

That's what happens in ds' school in the first two years: with the exception of English, Maths and the 2 MFLs (and core PE and RME), the remaining subjects were done in blocks in rotation.

Ds school is very strong on doing 5 Highers in a single sitting if you're wanting to go to Uni. It was specifically mentioned to dh and me when we were being given a tour of the school when ds was in P6 (ds was a placing request). It also encourages Advanced Highers in S6.

If I remember, he had one period a week of Music and Drama in S1, and more English and Science. They do rotate Mod Studies/History/Geography as he as 2 x 50 mins each week and they do 8 week blocks of one before moving onto the other. Same with the sciences, although in S1 he just did "science".

I am not really concerned about the single sitting aspect although that wasn't an issue when I applied to Uni. Our local secondary is great at getting pupils accepted to Oxbridge and onto courses like medicine, so know how to play the game.

One problem at the moment is the increasing shortage of opportunities to study school exams at FE college,. For various reasons DS1 crashed and burned out of fifth year, I naively thought he could take a break and then do eg. Nat 5 Maths at college, not available anywhere in our region! I presume all the unit tests make them expensive to run.
I am jealous of the flexibility of the English Sixth form provision, especially BTEC's.
It's Highers or a vocational course, not enough for the children in between or late developers.
I also think primary maths teaching is generally not good enough and doesn't establish confidence with the basics.

wiggly that may also be due to the shortage of funding for FE colleges - the money being needed for universities with students not paying tuition fees...

BTW DD1 is repeating Nat 5 maths in S5 -she got a D last year (2pts off a C). The school weren't keen but have let her just do the exam again at the end of this year -she doesn't have to do lessons but does need to do a test in Nov and a prelim in Feb -if she fails the prelim she will have to go to revision lessons...the reason she can do it this way is there is no coursework for maths...
Is there anyway you can talk to his former school and see if they will just let him sit the exam there?

You are quite right about FE funding unlucky, it's too late for DS1 to go back to school and unfortunately he was persuaded to try an unsuitable access course at college that was not right for him. What would have been ideal would have been a part time job plus maths evening class,. Not possible where we live. It would take an essay to discuss what went wrong with DS, being in the guinea pig year for Nat 5s did not help!