Possible move to Scotland from England but should we be concerned about education?

[Wouldliketomove]

Hello Everyone,

As the title says, DH and I are carefully researching a possible move to Scotland for our family (two toddlers currently) but I am constantly reading worrying things about education in Scotland. I'm aware there are also soon to be significant changes, which complicates things further and introduces more unknowns.

Can anyone with experience either as teachers or parents offer a perspective on education in Scotland at the moment please or any further insight into what is to come? I have tried to read what is widely available.

Thanks very much in advance

Same! I hated that book with a passion.

I did John Donne, Thomas Hardy and Tennessee Williams for SYS English. Tess and Far From..all good (had read them previously anyway) but by The Mayor of Casterbridge I was done. I still love Tennessee Williams but John Donne made me want to scream. I got to April then realised I couldn’t be arsed and dumped the course. This was 1990 and at my school few people were fussed about SYS which is a very different story to my DCs school now which strongly encourages at least 3 AH for most.

I've just been talking about this to a German friend. She was absolutely gobsmacked when I told her what my DC did for English Higher (aka practically nothing).

Yoir son sounds like he was really let down, the school sounds really poor. I would have been very unhappy with the experience you describe for my DCs and I think it’s a real issue that schools are able to differ in quality so much.

It's pretty high up in the league table in Scotland. In a fairly wealthy area. The teacher chose what she did for the English Higher books because it was easy and it was an available choice. And nobody in any school is studying anywhere near as much in their English lessons as children are studying in their "whatever language" lessons in the rest of Europe. I'd be prepared to bet a considerable amount of money on that.

It just goes to show I think that league tables don’t say much about the school. My DC’s friend is doing really well at their Oxbridge college if their exam results in their last 2 years are anything to go by, they seem to have been well set up to perform well.

It’s very hard if you feel your child has been let down, frustrating. My DC was looking for some work experience this summer, ended up with a paid internship and the company have given very complementary feedback and have offered sponsorship for the remaining 3 years of their degree with a summer placement every year. It’s not a huge amount of money but DC is pleased, happy for what this adds to their CV and it’s a big company with global offices so potentially a job with some travel at the end of it. They’ve had a very positive educational experience so far, seem happy and confident, had time to improve life skills with part time jobs and other activities in their wider life and I’m grateful for the position they are in. Where we live there are definitely schools considered good and bad and my DCs school falls into the latter category in terms of a straightforward “how many kids who were on the S4 school roll get 5A-C passes at Higher in S5” but in terms of support and opportunity I can’t fault it.

League tables are nonsense.

My daughter is s3 and they’re doing animal
farm just now. She is really enjoying it so is reading a few more books of that genre on her own time.

We moved the other way as my husband lost his job and we had to relocate. Mine was very behind when we arrived in England.

I think you need to look at which area in Scotland your interested in then narrow it down to the schools. Scotland is a 7 hour drive from north to south and varies vastly in terms of weather, schools and attitudes depending on were you live. The Highlands can be much cooler than the Central belt although not as cold as they used to. The south of scotland has been infrastructure and more opportunities work wise. The north tends to be more relaxed way of live. Some schools are better than others. My children's current primary is very good with mininal behaviour issues ut the last one had significant behaviour issues from some kids. The difference is how the leadership team approach things like bullying or poor behaviour although the Scottish governments policies do make it harder. My oldest is in secondary and is happy there to.

I like the Scottish system with National 5’s, highers and advanced highers.

In 3rd year at my children’s school they narrow their subjects down to 7 they study them over 2 years then sit the 7 exams at the end of 4th year.

In 5th year they can then choose to do Highers(up to 5 ) or do less highers and pick more National 5s to study. At the end of 5th year they sit exams for these subjects.

In 6th year they can then choose advanced higher relating to the Highers from 5th year , choose more highers( depending on general grades they can choose to crash some highers) or they can sit more National 5’s again sitting exams at the end of the year.

grades are marked between exams and course work rather than just all focussing on exams.

Ds chose 5 highers in 5thyear and 4 higher in 6th year , (2 of which he crashed)
Dd chose 5 higher in 5th year and in 6th year did an advanced higher and 3 higher (again 2 of which she crashed.

lots of choice and flexibility.

@2chocolateoranges In 3rd year at my children’s school they narrow their subjects down to 7 they study them over 2 years then sit the 7 exams at the end of 4th year.

I think that's the very opposite of "lots of choice".

Choice is more in the senior school - you could pick up 10 subjects if you so wished (though 6 or 7 would be more normal) in S5 and 6, as opposed to the A Level system which is more narrow. Swings and roundabouts though

if you read the rest of my post you can see that in 5th and 6th year they have the option of choosing more national 5’s.

its a great system so that all children whether they are academic or not are able to progress through the full school system rather than when I was younger and less academics children who would never achieve a Higher Grade were “forced” to leave at the end of 4th year.

so if they leave 4th year with ok grades and know they won’t achieve a higher then can choose 5 national 5’s to study rather than leaving school with no clue as to what to do.

it gives most children more options.

Then you don't do any subjects at a higher level, as you aren't doing any Advanced Highers. Just the rote-learning, low-content Nat 5s and Highers.

And as already discussed, it's very common to do A, B, C, D, E, F subjects at Nat 5, and then the same A, B, C, D, E subjects at Higher - so you're only studying a small number of subjects. At GCSE level, people study up to 12 different subjects. They then move on to study 3 subjects at A'level. Those subjects may be the same, or they may be different (for instance psychology or law).

My DC wanted to get into a decent uni, which meant taking some academic subjects - at Nat 5 and then following through to Higher and Advanced Higher. This meant that they weren't able to do any fun, creative subjects - music, art or drama. It also meant that they were forced to choose between the sciences and the arts and languages or humanities subjects very early. Whereas in England you can do everything until 16, plus a couple of fun subjects, and only specialise after that, at A'level stage. In Scotland you really need to make the sciences or not choice at 13, but in England you can make it at 16.

So I was very struck by how restrictive the education was - it was particularly bad having to choose between sciences and not at such an early stage, ending up with very little scientific knowledge and risking making the wrong long term choice. And DC was pretty sad about not being able to do any fun subjects.

In Scotland there isn’t really an importance to study advanced highers.

i feels sad to study for 12 exams and then the year after only be able to pick 3 subjects.

university gives 2 different sets of grades for entry into their courses. They base their grades on one set of exams and then 2 sets of exams.

Ds didn’t do any advanced highers and still got into uni and graduated 3 years ago, worked his arse off and has recently become chartered.

dd did one advanced higher which was art and has just graduated with a masters in engineering and is working with a huge engineering company.

i hate how people are knocking Scottish schools and how they do things, if you don’t like our system move to England and send your children to school there since their system is much more superior.

@2chocolateoranges You're quite right that the system is superior in England. And in other countries too. Again and again we hear from people whose children moved in one direction or the other, and found that Scotland was way behind. If you're fed up with hearing that, maybe press your MSP to try to bring about some improvement.

Your statement "In Scotland there isn’t really an importance to study advanced highers." says it all really. No interest in the child actually being educated - as in being challenged, stretching themselves, learning to use their own initiative, etc. My DC did Advanced Higher English and they actually read and wrote about a few books! Which didn't happen at Higher level. For me it's not all about doing the minimum to get into university, to then get a job. Every child should be encouraged to stretch themselves and reach their potential at school.

There’s a lot less early specialism in Scotland. This can be positive. My friend, professor, head of school at top Scottish university finds that students from England lack diversity of knowledge despite having excellent grades. Their numeric literacy lacking in particular compared to Scottish students who are less likely to drop maths early.

And my kids both did advanced highers.

@mammut I'm very surprised by what you say about children in English dropping maths early. GCSE maths is seen as absolutely essential. As far as I know (everyone says this) it's impossible to get the most basic job if you don't have GCSE maths and English. So that means taking those subjects for 5 years at secondary school. Then for the last 2 years of secondary (but remember that secondary school lasts for 7 years in England, not six) you can narrow down to 3 subjects. Which is a good preparation for university. A'levels are hugely more advanced than Highers.

As I've said, I think there's more early specialism in Scotland. Because children have to make the choice to go with the sciences or not in the second year of secondary school. Which is 3 years earlier than in England, where children can study a very large selection of subjects up to GCSE (after 5 years of secondary). My DC was definitely disadvantaged by having to drop sciences early, and by not having enough space in either Nat 5s or Highers to study any fun creative subjects. You can't in practice take physics or chemistry or biology or maths or French or various other subjects at Higher level if you haven't done them at Nat 5.

I have heard they don't expel children now. This definitely wasn't the case in the past-they used to not tolerate assault of children or adults, but several Scottish posters still there have said this.
Mind you, England isn't exactly great at that now either.

They’ve sadly messed up science at secondary school especially chemistry.
The transition between standard grade and higher means having to “unlearn” a load of things which is crazy. The basics should be taught and then advanced further by building from that, not throwing in weird random complicated formulas to commit to memory without understanding. I’m glad DD is out of it now.
(I studied chemistry up to SYS as it was in the 80s.)

My son crashed 2 highers. He chose physics at higher “for fun” he needed another subject to fill his timetable. He got an A in it.

Depending on the child’s willingness to learn and the schools willingness to support, it is allowed. And this was a run of the mill state school.

How can there be less specialism when Scottish kids are only taking 7 Nat5s?