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

You should get in touch and let them know they are wrong. Also give UCAS a shout while you are at it.

It's still 3 years of low key, low content study in Scotland as against 4 more intense and high content years of study in England.

English schools have upped their game in recent years. Whereas Scottish schools, already far behind (and, to be fair, with one year less school education than in England) are constantly dumbing down. The mission statement is equity (every child achieving the basics) rather than the English mission statement of every child achieving his or her potential.

I suspect that politics has something to do with it. But look at how people behave on the ground - eg that the acceptance rate of Scottish applicants to Oxbridge is very low, and they are required to achieve higher band As in Advanced Highers (which obviously doesn't suggest that Oxbridge thinks that Advanced Highers are more advanced than A'levels). I'd also be interested to know how many Scottish students St Andrew's takes on who are not on the disadvantaged route (widening access and gateway programmes - there's a lot of emphasis on these routes if you look up how to apply to St Andrew's as a Scottish candidate).

Why are you so focused on this? You have fundamental errors in understanding of current qualifications in Scotland but still you pursue? The relentless negging of all things Scottish on mumsnet is extremely tedious.

I don’t think Scottish schools are that focused on Oxbridge tbh. There are plenty top universities here and they also don’t charge fees. The official position is that AHs are a higher level of qualification than A levels. Asking for a higher grade of pass is the same as asking for a starred grade at A level.

That doesn’t even make sense?

Scottish students have never gone to Oxbridge in high numbers. I was a suitable Oxbridge candidate a million years ago but didn't apply as an undergraduate because a) why go so far away when there were good universities in Scotland and b) why go somewhere that needed good SYS grades when I was getting unconditional offers based on my Highers. I did do my DPhil in Oxford but moving to another country for postgrad is much more common.

I get a bit fed up with the Scottish exceptionalism we see so much of on here - why not actually look at the facts? Person after person has come onto threads on Scotsnet to say that their child moving into the Scottish education system from any other education system found things much easier - were literally years ahead. Or that they moved from Scotland to England and were miles behind and really struggled. I remember a professional working with young children in both England and Scotland who said that children here were a couple of years behind children in the English system by age 7 or 8. I have literally never seen a poster saying that they moved from Scotland and their child was ahead in their new school system (though I live in hope where the US is concerned). Yet people still spout nonsensical beliefs, such as that a relaxed 1 year Advanced Higher is a more advanced qualification than an intense 2 year A'level. If we don't accept that there is a problem, and try to do something about it, what can we expect other than yet more dumbing down? But our children are leaving school and going into a global economy which is rapidly getting much tougher. And we expect so little from our children - it feels disrespectful, frankly. They deserve to be excited, challenged, encouraged to reach their full academic potential. Of course all of this would be even worse if Scotland were independent. Being a successful small country is surely largely about the quality of your education system.

If you look at what the children are actually doing in those courses it does make sense. I've described how my own DC did 3 Advanced Highers, and had a very relaxed time of it, with few teaching hours and plenty of time for fun, relaxation and a part time job, while still achieving high grades. I know young people who've done 3 A'levels and there are far more teaching hours and far more work is expected of pupils.

I appreciate that relatively few Scottish people apply to Oxbridge, but a low percentage of those who do apply are accepted, compared with other parts of the UK.
And as you say, most young people stop at Higher level, which is well below A'level level. A'levels are the norm in England.

Advanced highers are supposed to be more independent study, and it’s only one year course.

It’s not a nonsensical belief, it’s the official position. The educational systems are different but that doesn’t mean everything Scottish is shit. My Scottish children had a broad education and are thriving. Are you unhappy with your children’s education? Did they go on to an English university?

I know it's a one year course, yet people are still stating that it's a higher level qualification than the 2 year A'level (both for 16 year olds at the point of starting). And yes, it includes independent study, as do A'levels. Eg the history A'level I looked at yesterday includes a 4,000 word dissertation. But it also includes a lot more teaching and 2 written exams rather than 1 in the Advanced Higher.

@Mammut The official position is that Advanced Highers are more advanced than A'levels. So despite all the evidence to the contrary (just look at the curriculum for each exam, as a good starting point, and just consider that one is a 1 year course and the other a 2 year course) we must be good citizens and believe the official position. That's working well, isn't it? It's magical thinking.

It is a higher level but a one year course. Just like a masters is a higher level but shorter course than undergrad. What are you finding so hard to understand?

Students will usually have the higher (=2/3 A level) before doing the AH. Ages at starting courses do not equate as the age cut offs afe very different in Scotland.

Where do you live @Scrumptiouslyy

I'll have to tell my students that their AHs are a "relaxed" course 😂 I suspect the pp's children were just particularly bright. S6 can seem more relaxed I suppose as they have study periods for the first time (I had those all the way through A Levels)

The watering down of the curriculum up here is horrifying. CSYS music used to be Grade 8 standard (entry level for a conservatoire) - Advanced Higher now is Grade 5! It’s a joke. The slide in standards is everywhere. Kids can pass Higher English now without ever reading a full book cover-to-cover, never mind touching Shakespeare. We are completely failing bright pupils. My son is only now finding the work challenging and he's in second year of uni - a bright kid but nothing remarkable. As PPs have said, if you look in isolation at Scotland you might think your child is getting a good education but not if you compare to other places.

Can’t we just look at the PISA stats to see how far Scottish education has fallen? Absolutely nothing will be done about that though while the Scottish government insists on continuing to ignore the truth.

Why are you refusing to listen to anyone who has experience of both systems, and so can actually do a genuine comparison? If you're not interested in my experience (children in the family in both systems), then read what this poster said upthread. They say that Higher was the same level as GCSE and Advanced Higher was the same level as the 1st year (of 2) of A'level, except that much less work was covered in the Advanced Higher than in the 1st year of A'level.

"Dd and her cousin are the same age. Dd did gcse then a levels in maths bio and chem. DN did the same plus english.and geography at higher and advanced higjer in maths and chem. They did compare notes and sylubus. Dd GCSE concepts were Higher level
in scotland and her yr 1 a level work comparable to the advanced higher but the ciriculum was much smaller. Both now 2nd year uni in england Dd no issues DN had to resit 2 exams and struggled with the jump. Both doing biomed.......DN does.feel.he wasnt taught tonthe same level as his english course mates at school"

And I can confirm what is said by boobashka about Higher English. My DC got a high grade in Higher English, without reading a single book.

That’s appalling isn’t it? That’s not a proper English qualification at all surely?

@Klippa In Scotland, you can go from Higher English straight on to study English literature at university. In fact, that would be a standard thing to do, as most pupils don't do Advanced Highers.

I know. I’m in Scotland. I made my eldest do higher English but after seeing what she did I realised there was no value in the syllabus whatsoever. No reading, marks awarded for how you laid out answers rather than what you knew. Less than half of her year took it because those who knew how bad it was made their kids do something else instead. Most 5 higher kids did something else instead that was a bit different - music, language, PE.

Most kids in my child’s school did AH. It depends on the area you live in. Central belt big middle class schools are going to fill AH stem subjects and English quite easily. If you live in the country with fewer specialist teachers who can teach AH you’re more likely to have to fill S6 with random highers. Thankfully unis appreciate this and don’t insist on AHs