Councils restricting all children to six Nat 5 choices - any push-back from parents?

[OhBuggerandArse]

I'm trying to find out whether there is any organised resistance to the decision by a number of Scottish councils to restrict the number of Nat 5 exams to be taken to 6 per child? I'm very worried indeed about this, not just for my own kids but for the direction of education in general. It is already beginning to have a damaging effect on pupils coming through to HE - I know it is technically possible to do a crash higher in subjects not taken at Nat 5 level, but the disincentive for any
subject with a cumulative aspect (languages, music, etc) is really significant. I can't see any way of getting councils to move on this without significant outcry from parents, and would really like to find out if there are any campaigns already up and running.

Ds' old school offers a full complement of AHs (which is also why it isn't eligible for the AH Higher Cluster run by Glasgow Caledonian) .

It also experimented last year with early presentation in S3 of a class of Nat 5 English (they'd been going to do it with ds' precocious English class but they didn't get organised in time). I think the thinking is to either let them work towards the English Higher over 2 years and/or free up enough of the timetable to allow them to do another Nat 5 or maybe an extra Higher next year. I know the head teacher (an English teacher herself) is not keen on presenting them early for Higher English as it involves a bit more maturity than S4s would have.

It doesn't seem fair that there is such a postcode lottery . Ds' school is not in a "leafy suburb" - it has a very mixed demographic, with 10% of its intake consisting of Roma , and a high proportion of EAL speakers (55 languages spoken in the school ) - which, shockingly, isn't taken into consideration when calculating the virtual comparator! . But it does have an excellent Senior Management Team and Glasgow City Council, for all its faults, does give the secondary schools a large amount of autonomy.

As a parent I am quite comfortable with 6 national 5s in S4. At my DSs school they cut down to 8 subjects + PE+RMPS in S3 and then picked 6 of these subjects for S4 (were allowed to "crash" some subjects e.g. music or PE in S4 with permission of head of department). It suited my DSs. S3 to try out subjects and less to do in S4. DS1 found step up to S5 hard but I think he would have anyway. DS2 didn't notice but he's a naturally smart but not hardworking just does what he needs to get to the next stage.

I'll come back and read this thread fully later on.

Haggisaggis's experience mirrors ours.

Our school wouldn't have time to teach more than 6 because they won't start in S 3. A while back when I bothered asking questions I was told "It's against the spirit of the CfE."

S3 was a waste of space, another place marking year for my eldest, no homework. (S6 was also a complete waste , different issues.)
Truly I feel my child was let down by the education system. I will say he can be a lazy so and so (or relaxed and not prone to panic depending on how you like to look at these things.) But so are many at this age. A system needs to work not just for the motivated minority.

Initially our school promoted the idea of not even sitting any National 5s in 4 th year.

My next one is moving through the system and personally I've given up engaging with school.

I agree with "closing the attainment ment gap is a race to the bottom."

It may have been "That would be against the spirit of the BGE" now I think on it more!

At the time it brought to my mind the quote about man not being built for the Sabbath.

Funny how ds' old school has managed to pass its BGE audits despite starting the Nat 5s at the end of S2 (8 subject columns plus PSE and RE) So it must be fulfilling the "spirit of the BGE"

Well there you go. It is perhaps also a consequence of local councils and schools deciding what suits their pupils. (Like they are all am homogenous bunch within a given catchment anyway.)

I can't bear the nonsense I've heard spouted over recent years.

So it must be fulfilling the "spirit of the BGE"

Unless that has flown out the window! :o

I think it is easier for the larger schools to fulfill anything as they can offer top up lessons in other things or small clusters of another thing in gaps in the timetable which is more easily managed when they aren't doing 10+ subjects in 3rd year and you have a bigger group of available teaching staff. DSs school was heavy on Maths and Science teachers and struggled for anything else. I think DS2 got 6 weeks of cooking and that was that, then the teacher retired, but you can't exactly sack all the teachers and start again, they have to wait for folk to leave to introduce more diversity.

Yes, my DC is in S3 and still gets almost no homework, and has never felt challenged, as far as I can tell.
It's not just about exams. I would quite like my DC actually to learn stuff, for the sake of developing skills and knowledge. But they are allowed to study so few subjects, and expectations seem to be low. It does seem to be about narrowing the attainment gap by making sure that the high attainers attain a lot less than they could.
We've been doing stuff at home outside of the curriculum. Otherwise the school situation would really get to me.

It's not the exams for me either, that was just a symptom of a system unable to provide consistent learning challenge to pupils.

coggle I find it really depressing when I read comments about having to push bright kids at school or home. What is the definition of a "high attainer"? I ask because a child who is good at Maths will be getting 90% plus in Higher Maths with very little effort or homework. However an "average" Maths student will have to put in the work to get 70% at Nat 5. The same is true for English. The number of DC who actually have equally "high attaining" facility in both English and Maths is very small. I don't think the education system or parents should respond to this issue by "pushing" or "stretching" "high attainers". I would rather they be left sufficient time and freedom and given sufficient opportunities both at home and school to push and develop themselves. They usually have sufficient internal pressure without the continuous weight of external expectation to do more just because.

The whole thing about GIRFEC - getting it right for EVERY child. Every child. Not just the ones who struggle. And that's not working either, because Nat 4s are such a mickey mouse qualification that schools aren't offering it any more.

The whole thing is just such a mess. I have several friends who are teachers and very few of them are huge fans of CforE, especially at secondary level.

What is their objection to CfE at secondary piper? I ask because I have 2 DC who have been through it and from my perspective, as a parent, they have learned everything I learned at secondary school and a lot more. I am a fan.

closing the attainment gap is a race to the bottom

How much I wish this wasn’t the case.

We live in a council area that restricts to 6 choices, and in zone for a school that restricts things even further by not even offering the full range of subjects aged S3. The closest other council area also only allows 6 Nat5s so we can’t even go out of area with a placing request because it wouldn’t make a difference. The only way our DC can do more is by paying to go private. It stinks.

At the minute our thinking for DS is that he will sit 6 at school and then I will teach him an extra 1 at home which he will then sit as an external candidate. He is also interested in the possibility of going to evening classes at the local college for a second language. (Because his school only offers French and he really wants to do Spanish as well, which he already has a basic understand of.)

I know that parents and teachers in some schools in our council area, and in the neighbouring council have complained/petitioned etc but it’s done no good at all.

If we could leave Scotland we would - we are actively trying to get out and education is one of the biggest reasons. Our children are being failed.

Tami where do you think is preferable? Now I have DC at University application stage I am very thankful that almost on the flip of a coin DH and I chose to give my DD the opportunity to pursue 3 Advanced Highers and an additional 4 Highers rather than restricting her to 3 narrowly related A level subjects at age 16.

6 Nat 5s chosen for breadth are enough to afford the same opportunity to all DC with the academic capability. (mine did 7 but had 2 to spare in terms of Nat 6/7 conversion)

I would caution heavily against pushing for breadth at the expense of depth at Nat 5. A lot of DC struggle to make the jump to Nat 6 if they have not laid the foundations firmly enough. Too many subjects can make DC adept at doing just enough and ignoring what they don't understand.

Howabout - I don't really understand your point. At DC's school all pupils are in the same class (no ability setting) and do the same work. My DC is a bright and mature all rounder and finds school easy and boring. That doesn't lead to her spending her evenings opting to read the Encyclopedia Britannica though. I give her the chance to learn stuff that they don't do at school and that she will find very useful in life at her own speed outside of school. For instance she's learning a language the school doesn't offer and now speaks it fairly fluently. So shoot me.

Read what I posted above coggle.

I am struggling to understand your complaint with the school system. Ours also has no ability setting. I would hate for mine to be bringing home lots of "busy" work HW and being made to do Nat 5 PE and RMPS, as some are, just because it is part of the core curriculum.

We are looking at jobs in NI which would be our first choice. Second choice would be London - but it’s a poor second and in reality, if we wanted to go to London we could have done it already, but we are wary for a variety of reasons.

Coggle - my DS is the same - bored stupid at school and the school just doesn’t care. He gets 95-100% in pretty much every assessment (Think he’s got a handful of low 90s since he’s been there) and puts zero effort in to get those marks. He is one of the only children to actually complete the (tiny amount of) homework they are set and gets zero feedback on that other than a mark. School is frankly a waste of his time. He does additionally study at home because he’s interested and because we want him to appreciate learning for the sake of learning, and to actually use the brain he’s been given to the best of his ability. We want to teach all our DC to always do their best and never settle. Unfortunately, the school doesn’t back this up.

DH grew up in England, I grew up in NI, we both have family still there - kids at school and family members who are teachers. We have also lived overseas for a few years. The education system in Scotland is by far the worst we have experienced.

So if your kids did seven subjects howabout, was it compulsory maths English plus 5 free choice?

Or did they have to do compulsory PE, RMPS or other?

I

Compulsory English and Maths.
Then from memory: 1 science, 1 Humanity/RMPS, 1 Arts/PE, 1 IT/Language, 1 choice (mine did 2nd science)

A couple of posters above mention their ds receiving little or no homework in S3.

Our school is the same, but it is expected (communicated to pupils) that in S3/4 they are expected they do 1-1.5hrs of any given home work or topic revision each day after school. Teachers keep track of how they are doing with regular class/topic tests.

Ds does 1hr a night (most of the time) while the parents of a few of his friends complain about lack of homework but don't encourage revision each night as they aren't aware they should be (haven't been told by their child, or given/read/remembered the handout from school last year). The difference in the results in class assessments is clear. Ds gets better marks but only because he is encouraged at home to put some work in.

It works OK for us, I had to support him to work out how he best revised independently and I hope learning how to do this now helps him when he gets to future prelim and nat5 exam revisions. Some of his teachers, especially maths, also put optional revision sheets on the homework portal which they can do and teacher will mark if requested.

Might be worth checking with your schools/dc what the expectations are for revision and what they suggest, I know a few of ds's friends parents were unaware that it was expected at our school.

Just to be doubly clear PE and RMPS are compulsory subjects in all Scottish schools in S4. However in most schools they are not taught around the Nat 5 syllabus with a view to sitting an exam unless taken as an exam subject. In a few LAs the view taken is that if they are being taught anyway the pupils may as well take the exam. The bonus is that parents take a lot of pressure off the schools as pupils then have 9 exams, the same as England.

Actually in England, 9 translates to 10 as they have English x2 or more likely 11 as the bright pupils are doing x3 science. Post GCSE reform very few English pupils are being offered, much less pursuing 11 or more. The norm is 8/9 which is in fact exactly the same as 6/7 in Scotland.

Howabout I appreciate your answer. However I think if my kids, like yours had 5 choices taken to National 5 I'd have less problem with the system. It may seem petty but it's 16% more workload required at S4. I think my kids too could cope and benefit from it given the chance.

Howabout - what are you finding it hard to understand? I would like my child to be challenged at school to work at the speed and level that she is capable of. Not just to sit around helping the least able children in the class because the work is too slow and easy for her. Why should she be held back rather than taught at the correct level? Why should she spend years being bored and leave school with less in the way of knowledge and skills and work ethic than children in other countries?

It's not great for Scotland either. It's wasting the potential of a large percentage if its children - the next generation of adults. It should be encouraging excellence, not mediocrity.