Scottish education - what’s gone wrong?

[miimblemomble]

Expat / emigrant Scot here.

I keep reading on threads here that ‘Scotland had a great education system but that’s all gone now’ and other similar comments. My SIL lives in Edinburgh, she’s not a fan of Nicola sturgeon or the SNP and part of it’s because of what they have “done to the schools”. I haven’t seen her in over a year now (thanks Covid) so haven’t asked what she means.

So is it true? What has had such a bad effect on the schools? I grew up being told that Scotland had the best education system in the world (not sure how that is measured) but that doesn’t seem to be the case. So what’s happened since?

Cheers all.

Re. Uni places... we are on the other side of this debate - though my oldest is only 13 so still a few years away. It's true that Scottish universities have in the past been obliged to offer places to EU students at the same fee level as local (Scottish) students. I know a lot of British and EU people in France whose children have taken advantage of this - but I can see why it pisses off those who actually live and pay taxes in Scotland. From the EU pov it was part and parcel of being in the EU - freedom of movement, equal opportunities etc. Scottish students were just as able to go to university in France or Germany etc (though of course far fewer did, because far more Europeans speak good English than Brits speak good enough German, or French etc). This has changed since Brexit. It's very complicated, and much depends on the residence / nationality of the student who is applying. The arrangements below were a concession made by the UK government after pressure from UK nationals living in the the EU who had previously hoped their children could go to uni in the UK.

For AY 2021-2022...

EU students (EU nationals who have only lived in the EU) are now to be classed as international students. Fees up to 30K a year though some scholarships are likely to be made available.

UK nationals who have lived in Scotland but are now resident in the EU MAY be classed as Scottish students if they can prove their previous residence in Scotland. Fees £1,100 per year - paid by the Scottish government - and can apply for loans in Scotland.

UK nationals who have lived elsewhere in the UK (England, Wales, NI) and are now resident in the EU will be classed as "Rest of UK" for fees: fees £9,250 per year, can apply for a loan to their home government.

UK nationals who have never lived in the UK and are resident in the EU - same as "Rest of UK" for fees, and can apply to the SAAS for a tuition fees loan only.

This is the latest from the Scottish Govt, but the message is yet to filter through to the Unis. I just know about all this as I help advise students applying through UCAS from our international school here in France. The above arrangements are in place until the AY 2027/28. No one knows what happens after that.

Sorry to go OT!

The learning experience stuff happens too early (I can see that buy in is important at upper secondary etc), children of 6 or 7 barely know what a learning experience is let alone how to set a good target and evaluate it - talk about meaningless admin for teachers.

It's the same with the big projects, hard for them to do a good job of those when they don't have important basic skills like listening, writing, being able to form clear sentences and take care over their work or reading.

@Tallybeebloom that's a very interesting, and quite damning, take on the situation. I agree with you completely re the leadership thing. I'm viewed with suspicion because I haven't pursued promotion yet. I've not even been teaching ten years and as the years go on if anything I realise how much I still have to learn never mind firing my way up the ladder !

Many bits of your post seem a bit sweeping and overly harsh but I don't know if that's because I don't want what you say to be true if you know what I mean.

@Tallybeebloom

There is a whole range of issues that have impacted it. Universities in Scotland used to be at the forefront of research into learning and education, this is no longer the case. Once teachers in Scotland were being trained by educationalists who were carrying out this research into how children learn, now instead they are, for the most part, being taught by teachers who have come in from schools and who basically teach students based on their own practice, having no understanding of the theory behind this. Lecturers who do have a background in research, have often come from fields outwith education and never actually taught in a school themselves so have no experience of connecting the theory to practice. This has meant we have schools that are full of teachers who do not actually understand how children learn, they rely on a prescriptive curriculum to tell them what to teach and Curriculum for Excellence doesn't do this. We also have student teachers at certain universities spending more time studying philosophy than how to teach numeracy to children. Alongside this, you also have teachers increasingly moving into leadership roles in school very quickly, without having spent the time required in the classroom to really understand the practicalities of classroom practice and organisation or to develop their own understanding of children's learning. I've known headteachers who have only been teaching 5 years, with only 2 of them being as actual class teachers.

This is alongside SNP's and the universities' push for mastes level education for teachers, excellent in theory and would be fantastic if it were not for the way this is being carried out at universities, which is effectively leading to teachers getting masters and even doctoral qualifications, graded on undergraduate criteria.

There's even more to it than this (have a look at some of the stuff Walter Humes has written, he foresaw this happening) but I believe that this is much of the crux of it. Teachers are coming out badly prepared to teach from the universities, and if they get into the right school with the right headteacher then they'll be in a lucky position to move forward and continue to learn what they need, but in many cases this just isn't happening.

I don't understand your comment re headteachers - only two have been class teachers. Can you explain?

@StarryEyeSurprise not as strange as it might seem. I know a HT, very successful to be fair to them, who taught for exactly two years. Was promoted into some specialist PT post with no class contact and then after only one year was Depute. Five or so years later they were HT. It can and does happen. They were pretty outstanding though and managed well. I think they understood their limitations as a class teacher -although obviously never articulated it - and took relevant advice if and when required. Great manager and excellent HT.

Yes that makes sense but I think the pp that said only 2 of the 5 HTs were class teachers before promotion or am I reading it wrong? Quite possible - it's been a long day!

@StarryEyeSurprise they did! My apologies 🤦🏻‍♀️

Sorry, it was 5 years for promotion but they said only 2 HTs started off as class teachers so I don't understand how the others became HTs...

[quote kurtrussellsbeard]@StarryEyeSurprise they did! My apologies 🤦🏻‍♀️[/quote]
It's ok!

@kurtrussellsbeard

Many bits of your post seem a bit sweeping and overly harsh but I don't know if that's because I don't want what you say to be true if you know what I mean.

I know what you mean because it is a scary thought. Without going into detail so as not to out myself, I have spent a long time working within universities and working closely with those at the heart of this, many who over have been fighting a losing battle. There are absolutely excellent lecturers in education across Scottish institutions, but sadly the current systems being developed within them are either forcing these people out, leaving the less knowledgeable or 'yes' men to take the lead, or are unable to have the influence and impact that they were once able to. I think there has been a top down loss of knowledge and then schools have incredible pressure on them to mitigate the effects of this, leading to the constant implementation of new schemes and programmes, without actually ever allowing time for these to be properly embedded and developed.
I should make it clear though that I absolutely don't think that this is the fault of teachers, it is the current systems that have been implemented from the top but their effects have trickled down into classrooms and unfortunately, as it's systemic, it's not an easy fix.

The curriculum for excellence is dreadful. Jumps from place to place with no context and no foundations for learning. No progression. It's very bitty e.g. Eg introduced money and money problems before the children had got the hang of adding. Lots of jargon that isn't required to understand the concepts. C

The bigger problem IMO is that there is very little aspiration generally. All about closing the attainment gap - at the expense of letting the more able children coast.Very little focus on meeting individual needs or encouraging the children to excel at what they can. I call it the curriculum for mediocracy.

Lack of diversity - spent weeks learning about Scots poems when half of DS class has a diverse cultural and family background - surely it wouldn't be hard to ask children to recite a poem that is meaningful to them and their cultural background.

I don't understand your comment re headteachers - only two have been class teachers. Can you explain?

Sorry, I'm currently in bed with severe morning sickness so probably not writing very clearly. What I meant was I know head teachers who only ever actually taught in their own class for 2 years, and had only been teaching overall for 5 years (so were either doing supply or working elsewhere outside the classroom, such as an out of class promoted post) before they actually became headteachers.

@Tallybeebloom I had the pleasure of working in a Uni setting for a few years and although my colleagues were absolutely outstanding I'm saddened to say I do see the truth in what you say. Yes men and box tickers were on the up rather than the genuinely talented professionals. Like you I don't want to out myself but some of these people I worked with have reached quite dizzying heights, despite having no experience and questionable ideas and I suppose I always wanted to consider it a fluke rather than evidence of a wider shift.

My feeling is that the C for E is just as inflexible as the old curriculum, just a different style. All three of my boys have difficulties of one kind and another that affect their learning. They all struggled badlywith group work and presentations and the self analysis needed for learning evaluations.
The basics of spelling and grammar and arithmetic skills were acquired painfully slowly and erratically, fashionable methods didn't always work (Target spelling a particular disaster).
I think good old fashioned text books would help a lot, bits of paper and handouts made by teachers with no design skills ended up lost and discarded.
Is an exaggeration to say history and English are dominated by Scottish themes. A scottish angle is added to universal themes like migration but if you pursue history as an exam subject you'll cover a broad range (DS2 has ended up studying History at uni and is not behind the other students).
In fact I don't think all subjects have been dumbed down, many seem more challenging in fact, but there doesn't seem to be enough time to cover material thoroughly and fulfil all the extras in the school timetable these days as well as the catching up needed on basic skills after a primary education focusing too much on soft skills. Every year the kids seem a bit rushed and under prepared for exams.
Teaching can be inconsistent (we found this added to confusion in Maths)
I do think modern teens have a lower boredom threshold and more things to distract them but two of mine have ADHD so my perception might be off with this.
Foundation Apprenticeships are being pushed but they don't always seem to be properly implemented and can be logistically difficult unless you have a handy college.
I could go on....
Basically, it's overcomplicated, underesourced and surprisingly inflexible given that being flexible was an aim.

Btw I'm not saying I'm a genuinely talented professional in case I'm accused of sour grapes here. As mentioned in a previous post I just about shit myself daily at what I still need to learn.

Ok, they must have been class teachers before promotion though. It's near impossible I'd think to become a PT with no teaching experience ( in Scotland).

Re the jumping around/ no progression post- this is a tracker for P1. Pupils progress through the various areas.

Probably a bit small to read!

It is a bit @StarryEyeSurprise which is a shame as I've got one in P1. Would like a nosey.

My own experience as a parent I have to say has been great. I prefer CFE as a parent than a teacher!

Curriculum for excrement is the description I hear the most.

I think it was Jack McConnells baby was it not? I could be wrong. It should have been binned.

I dont think soft skills aren't important just that they are aquired relatively quickly when the pupils are ready to aquire them, they don't need to be laboured for years at the expense of actual subject knowledge or practical skills. I've noticed a distinct lack of skills teaching and an overemphasis on evaluation in Art, which is my area. The pupils can write about design briefs and dicuss the source of they ideas but they can't draw because they haven't spent anything like enough time being taught how to!

Oh this thread is worrying. You naively think your children are receiving a good education as I do think their teachers are lovely and kind and the atmosphere of the school is wonderful. It’s been a long time since I had any experience of schooling so I assumed my child was progressing well as this is what I’ve been told. There never seem to be any guidelines or a document of what they should be learning though. I’d be really interested if anyone have this. P1-P3.

My DC is very bright at maths - as everything on home learning was quite “easy” and there were multiple ways to do each thing (eg subtraction in 5/6 ways when actually dc usually knows the answer without number lines, etc etc but I was being supportive of school and assumed needed some foundations down). Sometimes work would come with optional challenges but again DC finds these relatively straight forward. This thread is making me wonder if my DC isn’t progressing as they should. I also thought some grammar type work in home learning was brand new having being told it would be new concepts but my DC said they’d done it before (applied to quite a few assignments).

I'm currently doing a Masters and the learning log is the hardest thing about it! Yes it's helpful to look at various approaches to learning as a postgrad - not as a 5 year old!

Bit five year olds do deserve that insight into their learning too. If they're learning to spell a word then I see no harm in spending a bit of time thinking about how they do that. It doesn't need to be anything major but it's a skill in itself and it therefore makes sense to introduce it early.