Moving from England to Scotland

[everydaysaschoolda]

Has anyone moved their child after GCSEs to Scotland? Are they compatible?
we are Scottish, DCs were born in Scotland and went to primary school there. We would like to move back. DD 16 is sitting GCSEs this year, we thought this might be a good time to move straight after her GCSEs so she’d get a couple of weeks in before summer holidays in S5. Other DC would be going into S3 so would be making subject choices. Been in touch with the school and they have no problem with it

i just want to hear from anyone who has moved between the 2 and the biggest challenges/differences please?

Where are you where Nat 5 is only one year? Its 2 years in most of Scotland surely?

From what I've heard Nat 5s used to be mainly done as 1 year courses and it's a relatively recent and gradual trend by individual schools to move to 2 years. I'd assume that it's another dumbing-down move - poor children who are stuck spending 2 years on what was originally meant to be a 1 year course and can perfectly well be done in 1 year. It means one year less of what can at least in theory be fun, creative and even genuinely academically challenging teaching years and 1 extra year of the tedious exam preparation grind.

So I'm very grateful (in a grateful for small mercies kind of way) that my DC's school did it as a 1 year course. It was tedious enough as it was, so imagine stretching that over double the amount of time.

I said in my original post that OP should check whether Scottish unis would accept Advanced Highers without HIghers (but with GCSEs). If you approached them they might well accept that. After all, they happily accept GCSEs followed by 3 A'levels, and posters on here claim that Advanced Highers are a higher level of qualification than A'levels, in which case why wouldn't a university accept GCSEs followed by 3 Advanced Highers?

I only ever taught Nat 5 as a one year course. We prepared for it in s3 by introducing the terms and techniques but never taught it over 2 years. Higher English meant teaching 6 Scottish poems by the same poet ie Carol Ann Duffy etc. You absolutely had to know them all to be able to answer in depth. I either taught a Shakespeare play and a couple of short stories as well or a novel and a play. I've never heard of anyone studying as little as your family. I think they've been having you on.

I recognise some of this. It's a big weakness of the Scottish system that there is little choice of Advanced Highers. You say that children study a book for Higher. Well, there is the option for the teacher to choose a book, but they don't have to choose that option. At my DC's school, the teacher chose a short section of a film in lieu of the class reading a book. For the second choice, the teacher chose a short story, so again not a book.
As you say, GCSEs are a 2-year course and there are separate GCSEs for English language and literature. What you also need to take into account is that in England a bright child may well take 12 GCSEs, whereas in Scotland that child would only take 5 Highers. In the 2 year period in which the English child is taking their courses for 2 x English GCSEs, the Scottish child is roughly speaking (because they may be taking 6 or 7 Nat 5s) taking half a Nat 5 course plus a Higher course. So I think the necessary comparison is between the 2nd year of Nat 5 English plus the Higher English, as compared with both English language and English literature GCSEs. Over those 2 years, does the Scottish child study a full Shakespeare play, a full 19th Century novel, a full 20th century novel and a collection of poetry? The answer is no.
And let's face it, children learn far more in a 2-year full on A'level course than in a 1 year much more relaxed and low teaching-hours Advanced Higher course. The fact that the child writes a long essay rather than a large number of middle length essays doesn't change that.
I agree with you on homework. People have different views on homework, but I think it can be very helpful, but only if handled well. My DC rarely got any homework in the first 3 years of secondary in Scotland, before the exam curriculum kicked in. When there was homework, it was just "design a poster" homework which a teacher throws out because they don't want to think about what homework would actually help. Well-planned homework can make a big difference.

I don't think DC was having me on! Their clear impression (admittedly the teacher didn't say this) was that the teacher didn't think the class were capable of reading an actual whole book for Higher English. It's great that you taught your classes an entire Shakespeare play. Do you know how common that is these days? You say that you only ever taught Nat 5 as a one year course, and I know that's uncommon these days. This suggests that you may have been teaching a while ago - just asking, as my impression is that things have been dumbed down in recent years, and that that is continuing to happen. I gather that the review that is currently being carried out will look at getting rid of exams altogether in some subjects.

I wanted my child to be educated - to learn interesting and important things, to discuss things, to analyse things, to consider things critically, to learn how to write well, to be challenged, to learn how to push themselves to explore knowledge, literature etc and reach their full potential. I'm not happy with the type of education where the child does as little as possible in order to pass a tedious exam where the main skill is knowing how to tick the correct boxes, to get a piece of paper which then gets them into a university where they can again get away with doing as little as possible to get another piece of paper they can show to a prospective employer. That doesn't = a good education and I think we will come to regret it as a society. So shoot me.

I would definitely do the 5 highers, it gives options for unconditional offers from Scottish universities, and I disagree with a PP saying good universities in England only pay attention to, and require, 3 AHs. DS has two offers from RG unis, one is unconditional and the other requires one A. The one we’re waiting for (excellent reputation, very competitive course, requires 2 AHs if 5As achieved at higher). Having looked at grade requirements for Scottish students for a competitive course at a range of ‘good’ English universities I was struck by the inconsistency of their approach, I’m not sure they all know how to deal with them and given free tuition in Scotland they probably get far fewer applicants from here these days.

That said, I was very unimpressed by the Higher curriculum (compared to what I did many moons ago), but it is what we’re stuck with if you live here. The potential for unconditional offers does help sweeten things though.

I have also noticed a crazy range of offers from RG unis in England. They just don’t seem to understand AH at all. DD had straight As at higher, applying for a course where the levels were AAA (no A*’s needed) and the ask was AAA at advanced higher which practically no one gets. She ended up staying in Scotland at a uni with a better reputation on a course with a better reputation where she’d been given an unconditional.

My DD was fortunate that she was in a school that offered 3 suitable AHs. What if your school didn’t?

Oh yea and some highers really are lame. Higher English being the worst of the worst. CfE is simply shameful. How long must our children suffer this before it’s binned?

@Firtreefiona one we looked at wanted 6 As across highers and advanced Highers, so needing an A in a subject at AH that they didn’t do at higher. 🙄

OP it sounds like the ideal time to move for both your DC. For S5 definitely do Higher then Advanced Highers in S6. There are still some students who go to University after S5 and the Scottish University entrance to first year is based on Highers. A levels can get entrance to second year university here so the time when there is overlap is more in first year if you have done Advanced Higher. Many feel that cushion is a huge help when adjusting to University life. Im not sure where @PuceGreenhas experience of, but as a secondary teacher in Scotland and one who has also previously taught in England, I would strongly recommend slotting into the conventional path! If there happens to be overlaps(and those will very much vary by subject) then that will help your DC feel more comfortable at their new school. The change of house, school system, country, friendships etc will already be a lot for them to deal with.

I won’t comment on Highers except to say that it would be best to do them and get into the Scottish system. There’s quite a leap to AH level.

A previous poster said that their school offered only two AH options - that’s so restrictive!

AHs carry a slightly higher UCCAS rating than A levels. Friends have found that the curriculum and independent study required for eg Biology AH and Economics AH covered a considerable amount of the work needed for these subjects in their first year of university study in English universities. AHs appear to be a (sadly rare now) Scottish system success story.

However, some competitive degree courses in England and also in Scotland certainly do require 3 Advanced Highers. The competition can be fierce and even if the prospectus suggests less or anything other than straight As, the reality is different!

So if you have an aspiring medical student or lawyer and want the option of studying down south then that’s what you’re aiming for.

So coming from England, It’s important to bear in mind that there are some courses in Scottish universities that admit no Scottish students some years unless they come from certain postcodes / demographics. You can’t elect to pay the fees either if you’re Scottish and the unis have used up their allocation of paid for Scottish students. . Many of our brightest and best head ‘down south’ and don’t come back. A downside of the paid tuition fees system.

N5 is a ONE year course. If schools are doing it over 2 years, QS would have something to say about that. It isn’t allowed.

As far as I’m aware every school in Scotland teaches Nat 5 over 2 years. They teach it in S3 and S4 and teach highers over 1 year in S5.

It's supposed to be BGE for S1-3 and then NAT 5 as a one year course in S4. Our school sticks to that here. I'd no idea some schools did it over 2 years.

Not every school teaches nat5 over 2 years. Mine didn't. We introduced terminology in S3 that they would encounter, but definitely didn't begin the course.

What do they do in S3 then? My DS picked his Nat 5 subjects towards the end of S2 and has studied these in S3 and 4.

They continue with a wide range of subjects in S3 before narrowing down to their Nat 5 subjects in S4.

What a waste of a year in S3! Why not just get cracking on the Nat 5 curriculum? My DS choose his subjects at the end of S2 and as far as I can tell has been working on Nat 5 work for two years. I’m no expert though-no experience of teaching. We just follow what the school does.

In Scotland many schools only do 6 or 7 Nat 5s so schools are supposed to carry on with the broader curriculum for most of S3. The idea was this would provide a better all round education for children as they’d be able to cover more topics in geography/French/physics
or whatever before dropping the subject. Remember in England kids go to secondary a year earlier than Scotland so they have 3 years of specialist teaching in all subjects before dropping some for GCSEs.

However, as you point out, many schools are not adhering to the 3 years of broad curriculum in Scotland

in Scotland there are a maximum of 13 years in school, 7 years in primary P1-P7 though children are not as young as in England when they start; then 6 years of secondary S1-6 though you can generally leave at end of S4 if 16 by end of August
In England there are Years 1-13 ( but most children also do YR making a total of 14 years)
in my daughters school they narrowed slightly in S3 before doing 7 Nat 5's in S4, definitely there has been some dumbing down, Higher English is not that demanding , unfortunately there still seems to be a lot of teaching to the exam with exact wording like parriots required rather than deep understanding in fact expanding on a question and giving more info showing depth of knowledge could actually get you penalised
However despite all this I would bnot advise doing advanced highers without f=doing highers as if they struggle they will have no qualification most universitires are looking for 5 highers in one sitting often AAAAA or AAAAB

Absolutely NOT true. And as I said, QS would come down hard on schools doing that. We were told many years ago not to do that. We use S3 to build key skills and introduce basic N5 concepts but no specific N5 content.

Showing depth of knowledge in Higher English is praised, not penalised. Yes, there is a formula for answering certain types of questions in RUAE, but that's to support the poorer candidates. I was a marker for a number of years