WT Actual F has happened to Scottish education under the SNP???

[YellowPixie]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2vk9gm4e0o

Analysis has been done into the pass rates of SQA exams, looking at the total cohort of S4 pupils and Nat 5s, rather than just the ones entered in the exams.

Only 40% of S4 kids passed Nat 5 maths. 25% have a pass in biology which they say is the most popular science. What a fucking shambles - no wonder they want to scrap Nat 5s, they can then pretend that everyone's a winner and give all S4s an "achievement certificate" irrespective of whether or not they would know a fraction if it came up and slapped them.

I agree that no system is perfect. I actually like the very broad nature of the system here in NI (and think it rather ironic that the big selling point of the Scottish system has been the breadth of it, when in reality, from S1-S5, it is narrower than the rest of the UK), and while the narrowing at A level has worked for my DC, I have also seen how it can be hard for those who don’t know what they want to do, so I do see your DB’s point. I think esp with covid, a lot of young people over the last few years have had no idea what they wanted to do and have found it hard to choose subjects for that reason.

My older two DC have loved being able to really focus on what they are good at and really interested in, from ages 16-18, while setting aside those subjects which they don’t love, all the while knowing that they’ve had a really good grounding in them up to GCSE. The younger one is less sure of what she wants so she may be one of the ones who finds it harder to narrow down at A level. 4 subjects in L6th is fairly common here in a lot of grammar schools though so that allows a little more breadth.

16 a week is far too many imo! There was a move here also to reduce the number of teachers a child would see, especially in s1 and s2 where it can all be a bit overwhelming after a primary spent with one or two teachers for a year.

Yes that does seem stupid. Many universities look for specific grades in specific subjects in both systems and simply substituting points is unhelpful. Also there are points allocated to random things, like music grades, that most universities really aren’t interested in.

This is a great answer, thank you for sharing this. I didn’t know that Nat 5 is more akin to Credit in SG. I did general/credit and got a 3, so there would be no Nat 5 award for me! I look at DD15’s Nat 5 work and it’s like they’ve invented new maths. I genuinely feel like I’ve never seen these techniques and principles before.

I have to say I disagree. Kids cope with lots of teachers and lots of subjects - sure they can get overwhelmed in the first month or two of form 1, but they adjust really quickly and the vast majority of pupils thrive. Schools are also really good and helping pupils adjust, and in the majority of schools, pastoral care is excellent. I think the Scottish way of dumbing everything down, lowering expectations across the board and trying to make everything easy and comfortable is a huge factor in where Scottish education has ended up.

@TamiTaylorIsMyParentingGuru the school could not allow DS, or other more able students, to take more than 6 subjects as that was a council-wide policy and the schools had to adhere to it. It has now been changed to 7, but that is still less than my DC do here at GCSE

That’s not true. DD15 is at a school in Aberdeen and doing 8 Nat 5s and Higher Music in S4. Happy to slag off Aberdeen City Council but let’s not make stuff up.

edit to add: school is not fee-paying

It was mentioned earlier that the big teaching unions have a lot of power in Scotland. I agree they do - and much too much influence over government.

Not making anything up - we left in 2018. Feel free to look up what the situation was at that point

You are comparing now to a few years ago. When it was introduced most councils did three years BGE followed by 6 Nat 5s as per Scottish Government guidance/policy. Many councils have shifted since then and moved to a 2+2 model in some or all schools.

With family in England and Scotland, there are (different) issues with both systems but up here the consensus from those with kids in the Scottish system is we do it pretty well on the whole. And those maths ‘stats’ are utterly disingenuous, as the media and people wittering on about them know full well I suspect.

Do you include the PISA stats in that?

Some councils seemed to have a “one size fits all schools” policy in terms of number of Nat 5s and others allowed different number across different schools. I was looking at this in 2018 before approaching DS’s school about their Nat 5 number as the LA we were in differed across
schools. This was useful to us as the school wasn’t able to say it was a LA blanket policy.

Your post literally says “it has now been changed to 7”. A cursory Google throws up a mumsnet thread from 2015 which speculates that Aberdeenshire was possibly limiting Nat 5s with no confirmation of whether that is true. Can’t see much else about that without deep-diving, and anyway, your posts have specified City, not Shire.

While your experience and insight are a great part of the discussion, please be clear on what the facts are now, or at least make it clear that you are speculating/unsure.

And before you accuse me of lying again @DaphneduMaureen - this is the CURRENT subject choice booklet for S3 students choosing their subjects for S4 at the school my DS was at

drive.google.com/file/d/16byT1qwfR9dC9oHNAI1TdzGhxawRbrkX/view

Thank you, I am happy to be corrected, but equally I am right to correct PP saying that it is now 7 Nat 5s in Aberdeen City.

See my post below your most recent one @DaphneduMaureen - it has indeed been changed from 6-7. At the time my DC were there is was a council wide policy and schools had no choice about offering more than 6 subjects. (We were not the only parents in our school to complain about this, and I know of parents in at least 2 other schools who also complained and went directly to the council about it when the schools themselves said their hands were tied). It may well no longer be a council-wide policy - I apologise if I got that wrong - but the school my DC were at (and yes - we put in placing requests for 2 other schools several years in a row) still only offer 7 subjects at Nat 5.

This ⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️

That might be the case for Harlaw, but it is still not correct to state that ACC limit Nat 5s to 7 across the local authority, as you did. You are speaking about one school, and I imagine gifted students are now allowed to do a greater number of subjects if they want to. Not invested enough to read that link, but let me know if it does say that you can’t do any more subjects. It’s really common round the corner at AGS for native speakers of modern languages to do the Higher in that language in S4, but I don’t think that was written in the subject choices handbook.

edit: cross posted with each other! I see you agree it is not limited to 7 now across the City.

I’m happy with the number of Nat 5/Highers/AH - that structure worked well for me back in the day and seems to be good for my DCs. The current rote learning and rigid working to the marking scheme plus what seemed to be a very subjective assessment at primary school of “we think your child is doing well for them-” is where the bollocks is IME. I arranged for both DCs to have tutoring in French despite being told by the school they were doing fine as as far as I could tell they had no grasp at all.

@DaphneduMaureen @TamiTaylorIsMyParentingGuru limiting subjects to a certain number was originally built in to CfE as the assumption was that kids would make choices in S3/S4 and continue on to higher and/or AH in S6. A higher could be done over 2 years or a N 5 could be an end in itself-they were never intended be done in S4 by the majority of children. This had the effect of narrowing the curriculum offer from S3 so it was widened a bit and is still wider than the A level offer. Logistically though I am not sure how you can cover more than 8 subjects in any school timetable unless you have a huge amount of staff or use online resources! Comparing the NI system to either Scotland or England is ridiculous, with a population of under 2 million people it's the same size as Manchester and has segregated schools and grammar schools.

Thanks for sharing this. I wonder about the resources too - it is a huge amount of work for young people and seems that if you miss something, the teacher never goes over it again. Once it has been taught, they move on. At my daughter’s school, pretty much everyone does 8 Nat 5s plus a Nat 4 in RMPS, with a few also doing a Higher in either Music or French/German/Spanish. HUGE amounts of content is on Google classrooms and it is difficult for my DD to stay on top of it. Stuff gets missed, and is never taught in class.

Not read any comments comparing the system to NI. I think me and Tami Taylor got a bit bogged down on one point regarding Aberdeen only there.

It was set at six Nat 5s in S4 as the number of teaching hours for each course only allowed that number. Where the number has been increased to 7 or 8 this is done by starting the focus on Nat 5s in S3.

The number of subjects allowed in Aberdeen City varies from 6 to 8 depending on school (not withstanding self-taught students in native languages). Harlaw is not doing well though and is being encouraged to reduce the number of Nat 5s:

https://education.gov.scot/media/fidkwchv/harlaw-academy-fi-191124.pdf

The entire education system is unfair, from primary right up to university.
If the teaching unions were as strong as claimed upthread, they would do more to make the government address discipline issues, ASN pupils in actual ASN schools (mainstream doesn't suit them all), and lack of teaching jobs.
The SIMD postcode system for university contextual offers also has some real drawbacks. It can feel very unfair. You could be living in a perfectly decent house, even a large one, with successful parents, but if your postcode is deemed 'poor,' you automatically qualify for a contextual offer. I know someone who attends private school, with very well-off parents, but they live in a SIMD 2 area and benefit from this. Another girl – my daughter's long-term school bully – who lives in a nice 4-bedroom semi, both parents have good jobs, but they live in a SIMD 1 postcode.
Our postcode is considered 'better off,' so until recently, my daughter wouldn't have been eligible for any extra support, even though she may have faced challenges. It seems like she had to work harder and get better grades than someone like her bully to get the same opportunities, which doesn't seem fair.
Then there's the issue of disability. I'm disabled myself. If I were applying to university today, my disabilities wouldn't automatically qualify me for widening access support according to many university guidelines. I could mention it in my personal statement or reference, but there's no guarantee it would be considered for a contextual offer, which feels very unfair.
It seems like parents are being encouraged to 'game the system' – moving to an area with a lower SIMD score, or even falsely claiming carer status. I know families who have done this. The bully I mentioned earlier falsely claimed carer status for her younger brother, even though both parents work full-time and her brother attends mainstream school full-time, and is currently doing National 5s. My daughter even registered as a carer for me this year, even though I'm fiercely independent. I encouraged her to do it because I knew it might help her applications. It feels wrong to have to resort to these kinds of tactics but hard work and good grades don't seem to do the job anymore.
Also, it's very easy to game the carer status system. For example, at Strathclyde University, all you need is a teacher to mention it in their reference. For Glasgow University, you can simply ask your GP for a letter of confirmation or register with a carers centre. My daughter simply told the carers centre about the chores she does - the same chores you'd expect any teenageer to be doing - and they didn't ask for any other proof, even though I could easily prove my disability should they have asked. Similarly, the GP didn't ask any questions. If you look at forums like Reddit and The Student Room, you'll see many people discussing how to game the system for contextual offers. Very little checks are done.
I understand the need to support students from disadvantaged backgrounds, but the current system doesn't always accurately reflect individual circumstances.
Even if only 40% of pupils are passing N5 maths, many of them will still get into university anyway under this stupid widening access process.

The bully I mentioned earlier falsely claimed carer status for her younger brother, even though both parents work full-time and her brother attends mainstream school full-time, and is currently doing National 5s.

Obviously I have no idea about this individual, but I know a lot of children with high care needs at mainstream doing National 5s, my DD included.

I have 3 UG degrees and 2 Masters with 6 disabilities and work for a disabilitly charity so don't need educate me on what disabled people can do. My complaint was about whether someone does actual caring. In this case, his sister doesn't do any caring for him, she admitted as much herself, rather gloatingly in PHSE as DD tells it. Nor does DD do any caring for me beyond normal teenage chores. So I maintain the WP criteria can be 'gamed' and the education system across all ages is shockingly bad in Scotland. DD only got the idea to apply for carer status from her bully so I guess we can thank her for that. I didn't think we'd succeed but it was shockingly easy to get registered.