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

My DC’s Physics AH involved a 4000 word experimental write up. In the aftermath of Covid the experiments for their STEM Nat 5 and Higher had been dropped so this was the first time DC had had to do anything like this. Was impressed how well they coped.

If you are doing 12 GCSEs then a twelfth of two years is the same as one sixth of one year in study time.

But simply going on study time is clearly nonsense - on the same basis you could say Highers are equivalent to a Masters degree as they both take one year!!

The Scottish government’s CfE introduced a three year broad general education for S1-3 then they rather belatedly realised that only allowed enough time to study six Nat 5s in S4 (study time required for qualifications is measured in hours not the number of years you study those hours across). Many schools have since decided six Nat 5s is much too narrow so have started doing eight - and this means narrowing down to those subjects in S3.

In terms of Highers, UCAS considers them worth 60% of an A level.

In terms of Highers, UCAS considers them worth 60% of an A level.

Which means (for those that don't know much about the science side of things) that five Highers = three A levels in UCAS points.

I don't know why @Scrumptiouslyy keeps saying people sit Highers at 16. A few will (just like my DD was 16 when she sat her FM AS level in England this year), but the majority will be 17. Lots of people defer their child starting school.

I took my GCSEs at 15, as did all summer-born pupils. And my A levels at 17.

Absolute rubbish about an 18 month gap. That’s not how it works in reality.

School intake runs March to February birthdays. So Oldest in year will be 5 years 5 months when start in August.

If your kid is a Jan/Feb birthday, many parents defer a year so the kid starts school at 5.5 rather than 4.5. That’s all.

Most councils will only allow Jan/Feb deferral. Very occasionally December if for example extra needs or very prem birth. I haven’t heard of a single one that would allow a Sept birthday to defer. So an 18 month gap is nonsense.

You are out of date. There has always been a right to defer as long as you turn six after the school commencement date in August (or at least since 1980), you just weren’t entitled to an extra year of nursery education. The government changed this about four years ago and now you have an automatic right to nursery education if you defer. This means it is no longer rare to defer children who turn six in September of P1 - and that there may be an 18 month age gap.

Each country will have their advantages and disadvantages.

I have two children who have gone through the Scottish system where we found teachers very supportive. We had a few challenging times for our eldest but both primary and high school were very helpful at working together with pupils and parents to sort the situation.

obviously the English and Scottish exam systems are different however free university in Scotland at present is amazing for students and parents alike.

mine have both recently graduated from university with degrees in STEM and have progressed to good jobs. I have nothing but praise for the schools both mine attended.(and the primary school is classed as in a deprived area.

there will be amazingly supportive and also diabolical schools in every country. A big part of the ethos of a school is their management team.

In Scotland you can actually defer your child if they are not 5 by the august start of term. For example if the school starts back 17 th August and your child isn’t 5 until the 18th of August, you can defer.

i work in early years and there are many children starting primary 1 who are nearly 6 whereas other will just be 4 and a half.

We have a choice of 2 - 1 is RC. Midlothian

It isn’t the start of term, it is the ‘school commencement date’ - which is around the start of term but the councils don’t normally change it every year so may not always fall on start of term. The council’s may not be aware of the distinction though.

I am sure there are 18 month gaps in classrooms now - my two friends have daughters in the same class but are exactly 18 months apart as the oldest and youngest in the class.

My daughter will have her first higher in s4 - she’ll be 15. She’ll be 16 for the rest of her highers and 17 for advanced highers. Am encouraging her to consider a gap year instead of starting at university at 17.

Again I dispute this. 2 years? WTF. Utter nonsense.

if kids stay on to 6th year and do Adv Highers, they cope perfectly well at any Uni. Some of my sons’ class hadn’t covered as much in their A Levels of the subject as he had in his Higher and Advanced Higher.

Are you aware that most schools now require pupils to have a full and demanding timetable for 6th year?

Compared to when I was at school, there is absolutely no “messing about” if you choose to stay on for 6th year now. Full timetable, encouraged to take Adv Highers or more Highers.

Your views sound very outdated and as if based on things years ago.

Oh piss off

Scottish universities have an extra year to get people up to standard (after they’ve usually wasted sixth year messing about).

Scottish universities have a fourth year because student can go to university straight from S5/Highers age 16/17. My DC did this - he never did S6. There are not many courses that require you to do S6. Medicine is one of the few that do probably because they need to be older and even then some will still be too young to start a medical degree in England. If you do AH you can often enter straight into the second year of university.

Really? Strong argument.....

Whether or not using academic testing at age 16-18 is the right way to assess an individual's ability for future life is a whole other discussion but I can't see how testing content learnt in two years is the same as testing content learnt in one. GCSEs are brutal. Weeks of exams. Nat 5s don't compare. At the end of DC first A Level year they were sitting with A*AA, so chances are they may (who knows) have come out with 5As at Higher. That dropped by final exams. It would be interesting to see how As at Higher transfer to Advanced Higher (which not many people sit according to stats).

I think the English system is academically more challenging. It's not necessarily better.

My middle child did Scottish AH economics and was miles ahead in the subject at his English uni having covered pretty much all of the first year curriculum. He also found dissertations much easier than his English peers having become used to a more independent method of working and dissertation prep during his final school year.

Personally I think Scottish advanced Highers are good and rigorous. Clearly so does UCCAs .judging by the fact they’re awarded more points than A levels.

A goid preparation for university anywhere. A friend who is head of Biology at a Scottish state school told me how demanding she thought the exam was when it was first brought in.

However the rest of the system really needs thought. The Nat 5s are formulaic and designed to destroy any joy in learning or extension.

GCSEs are each designed to require 120 to 140 hours of teaching

Nat 5s are each designed to require 160 hours of teaching.

Whether those hours are spread across six months or ten years is irrelevant. The number of exams is mostly a factor of the fact that GCSEs are shorter courses so more subjects can be studied within school hours, and the fact that separate papers are sat on different days (so unlike Nat 5s, feeling poorly one day does not wreck all your exams for that subject).

I would stop with the ‘two years’ thing - it is making you look foolish.

Advanced Highers are I believe a higher level of challenge than A levels. An A at advanced higher is equivalent in UCAS points to an A star at A level. A B at advanced higher equivalent in points to A at A level. And there’s further refinement in the Scottish grade with the upper and lower A so a kid with all A1 at AH has probably done better than one with all A star at A level.

Is the Scottish education system perfect? No. Do lots of us have bright children who have still done well and can hold their own with English educated peers? Yes. Is there yet more super boring English exceptionalism at play? Also yes

This is all rather interesting as someone new to all of this. But it all boils down to the same thing really - a bright, motivated NT kid with involved parents and a safe and supportive home will thrive in either situation. if you have a child who struggles in some way there might be benefits to one over the other (for my child, the Scottish system appears to be ideal with a gentler start to high school and more opportunities to be flexible). For children who are aiming for whatever intensely competitive programme, there are opportunities in either system for Advanced Highers, or dozens of GCSEs and both would give a decent shot.

I would think if you're moving your entire family to another country, this should only be a part of what you consider as the family's lifestyle is just as (or more) important than the school. For us, we have two decent jobs and can afford a nice home and spend lots of time outside away from any other people here in Scotland - this is very helpful for my ND daughter. I know most cities would be far more expensive in the South than up here so it would be more challenging to find the work/life/school balance we have. We are immigrants anyway, so don't have extended family to consider which is also important for most people. It all has to work, school doesn't happen in a vacuum.

I think pupils get far more out of an A'level than out of an Advanced Higher. An A'level lasts 2 years and involves hugely more work than an Advanced Higher, and a lot more content and teacher time. For an Advanced Higher there's a long essay, yes, but at A''level a pupil will write dozens of essays, which is far more helpful in learning and honing a good essay-writing style.
Tellingly, Oxbridge doesn't equate an A at Advanced Higher with an A star at A'level. Where it asks for an A star, it asks for an Advanced Higher in the higher A band. And the offer rate for Scottish applicants is very low - the lowest in the UK - which doesn't suggest that Oxbridge are thrilled by the quality of applicants.
Anecdotally, I'm told that at Scottish universities students from the EU are academically stronger (despite the language barrier) than students from England, who are academically stronger than students from Scotland. That's in general, obviously.

We always hear that if you have a bright child and engaged parents your child will thrive anywhere. But in my view the quality of what a child learns and how they're taught at school does matter. If you throw a bright child into a bad learning environment they will have a less enjoyable learning experience and will end up with less knowledge and fewer skills than if you threw them into a great school in a great education system. I don't think that's rocket science. And in a global world, the education we give our children really does matter. Things will only get worse as the teachers who went to school in the old days of a good Scottish education system retire and are replaced by young teachers who have been through the Curriculum for Excellence (so-called).

Advanced Highers build on Highers - it still takes two years to get an Advanced Higher.

I do prefer A levels, mostly because you do not have the break, stress and distraction of doing university-entry exams half way. A levels don’t have dozens of essays as part of their final assessment.

Applicant to offer rates for Scottish Students at Oxbridge are similar to England’s once you exclude Greater London and private schools. Scottish students also have the disadvantage of sitting Oxbridge selection exams based around A level curricula and schools that are not familiar with the process.

I think a lot of what is being discussed here is far more relevant to my son than my daughter and he's only 10 so I'm not really in that space yet. My daughter is thriving in the atmosphere she's found herself. She's not aiming for Oxbridge or St Andrews or anything like that... she's aiming for Dundee or the University of the Highlands and Islands. Or a college course in something creative (she's a dancer) to start as she's really young for her age and might benefit from an extra year at home. She can absolutely achieve any or all of this with everything she has and she is likely to avoid a breakdown, school refusal, or similar due to the relaxed uniform, slower pace and flexibility.

My son on the other hand is hugely competitive and very, very clever. I could see how he would thrive in the 11+ and grammars and dozens of GCSEs and flying off to any number of schools. He's pretty bored at primary school and will be bored for the first year or so of high school too. He's more likely to end up at St Andrews or Edinburgh or some super selective course somewhere else in Scotland - again, totally achievable and his future school is actually brilliant at encouraging and supporting the small group of very academic children, but I think he might do something else entirely if we lived in England and I do wonder about that periodically.