Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Scottish Secondary - Please help. New National 4/5 how many will your council allow?

298 replies

mustdash · 03/06/2011 09:49

Sorry this is long, but please help if you can.

I expect you'll only know the answer to this if you are a secondary teacher, or have a child currently in S1 or P7. I'll ask anyway, in the hope of getting enough answers to get some idea about how screwed children in Angus are going to be, compared to the rest of Scotland, if not the whole UK.

I discovered yesterday that for the new CfE National 4/5s Angus are only going to permit 5 subjects. I believe that nationally councils are allowed to chose a number between 5 and 8, and that the number they chose will apply to all state schools in their burgh.

I am seriously concerned that if children in Angus can only chose 5 subjects they will be badly disadvantaged in the future career or education market, and feel that S3 is far too young to be narrowing down such serious choices.

My thoughts, still a little random and ill informed are these;-

  • one of the main benefits of the "old' Scottish system was that having Highers before CSYS/Advanced Higher/A level was that it gave a broader education, and allowed children the opportunity to go into subjects in some depth before committing to final secondary year or uni. We are now asking children to make these choices 2 years earlier.
  • if you chose a subject at the end of S3, and later discover you don't want to/aren't capable of taking it any further, you are already cutting down your Higher options. (Personal experience here, loved O grade Physics, hated hated Higher, and dropped it - fortunately I was lucky enough to be able to pick up a crash higher in another subject)
  • academic children will be forced to drop arts subjects in S3, since they won't have the scope to do eg 3 sciences, and music/art.
  • fewer children doing "minority" subjects like eg art or music will mean fewer teachers and resources...and that our children will face a narrow and restrictive curriculum - the opposite of what I thought CfE was supposed to achieve. Hmm
  • Angus council have apparently stated that 5 subjects is sufficient because
a) that's what all the other councils are doing Hmm and b) five is the average number of standard/o grade type subject currently being sat by pupils at the end of S4. Hmm

Though they clearly have no grasp of how averages work, and seem to think that it is acceptable to apply a lowest common denominator approach to the whole system, I can't believe it is the same everywhere.

Can you please tell me how many subjects your council will be allowing for the current S1/P7 children onwards?

Sorry this is so long, and thanks for reading this far! Grin Any other random thoughts very welcome!

OP posts:
igggi · 11/06/2011 23:20

Not sure how the length of education will be affected - school leaving is the same? Unless you mean someone leaving at 16 only gets one year of exam subjects - but that's not all their education.

igggi · 11/06/2011 23:20

Not sure how the length of education will be affected - school leaving is the same? Unless you mean someone leaving at 16 only gets one year of exam subjects - but that's not all their education.

AngusOg · 12/06/2011 08:23

Unless you mean someone leaving at 16 only gets one year of exam subjects - but that's not all their education.

No, but at present, a Standard Grade course is two years of specialist study. These new proposals are badly thought out and seemingly allow one year for this. That one year may not be all their education but it is a concern if this is all that is offered re: studying for a worthwhile exam that will also prepare for Higher study. It is very likely that the bottom end of a cohort will leave school having never taken a formal exam at all, merely leaving school clutching a bit of paper from the school saying: 'I can do this, that and the other'. As I said in a previous post, as an employer, who would you take on as an apprentice - a kid with a handful of foundation level GCSEs from an English exam board or a kid with this nonsense from a Scottish school?

Have you read any of the CfE proposals or the draft documents on the SQA website about the new National exams / changes to Higher? Those are why the other teachers and me (also a teacher) are talking about what is going to happen to your children's future. Please read the proposals and comment. They haven't listened to teachers' concerns. Perhaps, if enough informed parents question things, they will listen.

AngusOg · 12/06/2011 08:26

This is a subject close to my heart because, as a secondary English teacher, my view is that the whole thing is a fucking shambles. The reason parents aren't being told anything is because schools genuinely don't have a clue what's going to happen.

Seconded.

darleneoconnor · 12/06/2011 11:20

The more I'm reading about the more worried I'm becoming. What do the Scottish unis think of this? Is admittance going to be based on Advanced Highers if the highers are being dumbed down?

If pupils can only do 5 subjects does that mean they can drop maths and english after s3?

AngusOg · 12/06/2011 11:32

What do the Scottish unis think of this?

The public discourse and debate about so serious a matter has been a deafening silence, so what the universities think is not clear.

Is admittance going to be based on Advanced Highers if the highers are being dumbed down?

It would seem it already is in some quarters. One of my ex-pupils applied to a High-ranking Russell Group University in England and, despite having 6 Highers, was given a conditional place based on obtaining 3 AHs. This application was not for medicine or law, btw.

If pupils can only do 5 subjects does that mean they can drop maths and english after s3?

English and maths remain.

darleneoconnor · 12/06/2011 12:51

so it's 5 including english and maths?

That's nuts! We'll end up with scientists/medics with no social science/arts knowledge or arty/crafty types with no scientific knowledge

pointydog · 12/06/2011 13:19

'What do the Scottish unis think of this?'

Scottish unviersity leaders have set up a task group in an attempt to clear up the confusion over admission to universities. It is expected to report by December on a number of concerns that have been raised by secondary schools. These include universities' admissions policies on the status of Highers achieved over two or even three years compared to one year... Some universities say they will treat all Highers equally; others say that where high-tariff courses are over-subscribed they will give preference to those who have achieved all their Highers in a single sitting and over one year.

This is from the TESS. If they don't report until December, that leaves very very little time to sort out S3-S5 for the first CfE cohort. It's grim.

igggi · 12/06/2011 14:01

One of the exemplars on the website has an option choice that does not have maths & english as compulsory - students have to take literacy and numeracy however. In theory there's no reason why they have to be compulsory. I think much of this would work out ok in the end if it wasn't also coming at a time of low morale, staff cuts, resources cut, pay cuts etc. Worst possible time for successful change.

igggi · 12/06/2011 14:01

One of the exemplars on the website has an option choice that does not have maths & english as compulsory - students have to take literacy and numeracy however. In theory there's no reason why they have to be compulsory. I think much of this would work out ok in the end if it wasn't also coming at a time of low morale, staff cuts, resources cut, pay cuts etc. Worst possible time for successful change.

justwannateach · 12/06/2011 15:00

This is a long response. Hopefully it answers all your questions. Just let me know if it doesn't.

You are all coming across an issue teachers have known about for some time. We have been unable to get anyone to listen. Perhaps you will have better luck. Here?s how it all works.

The past/now: Teachers taught from primary through to second year with a set of guidelines known as 5-14. In S3/S4 standard grades allowed students to sit exams at three levels, credit, general and foundation. Students are graded 1-6 (7 means no grade has been achieved) so they all get a grade.

?Higher Still? introduced Intermediate 1 and Intermediate 2. Int 2 was meant to be for students who would find higher too difficult and would allow them to continue studying subjects in 5th year, maybe as a stepping stone to a higher in 6th year. Int 1 would be equivalent to general standard grade. Both were externally assessed and graded.

Some schools began to use Int 1 and 2 courses instead of standard grade. They felt that students were able to gain certification earlier and it removed the wasted time in S2. Some did a straight replacement for standard grade with a choice of Int 1 and Int 2, some started Int 1 in second year and used Int 2 in S3 and S4, and so on and so on. It was/is not unusual to find every school in a given authority running a different system. Eventually it became clear that Int 1 and 2 would be abolished along with standard grade. They would be replaced with something called ?Nationals?.

The job of producing these was passed to the SQA (the Scottish Qualifications Authority). They are producing National 4 and National 5 which, by the SQA?s own admission, are very similar to Int 1 and Int 2. They are 160 hour courses (this means you can do roughly 5 in one year or 8 in two)

Here is the problem: CfE was supposed to extend through S3 with examined courses beginning in S4. That should leave you one year ? 5 subjects. In reality there are a number of different options:

  1. As above. 5 subjects in S4. Deal with it.
  1. Use S3. Do 8 National 4 and 5 subjects in parallel over S3 and S4. Problems: Can these different levels be taught in the same class? Int 1, 2 and higher were very different in some subjects and this was an issue. Also, you now have to start everything in June next year, a year early. There is no guarantee the courses will be ready by then. They certainly won?t be ready soon enough for teachers to get materials ready.
  1. Use S3. As above but run the courses as one year courses, 5 in S3, 5 in S4.
  1. Use S2. Have students choose options at the end of S1. Do National 4 in S2 then have everyone do National 5 in S3/4. Some schools are planning for this.Problems: It?s already too late to start this (but it could be done in future). It would involve ignoring the whole point of CfE in secondary (if there is one).

The actual response from LTS (who are ion charge of CfE) to your question is here (concern 4): www.ltscotland.org.uk/Images/SeniorPhaseStatement_tcm4-662739.pdf

Basically they say that the exact form of the curriculum will be down to individual schools. So that?s that sorted then.

As well as the above you have a number of other issues. For example, there is now talk of two year highers, of a move away from examinations in S4. The logic being that most students stay until at least S5 anyway these days. And the pupils who don?t? Well?that?s a good question.

Here?s another really big issue that nobody seems aware of yet. National 4 will be internally assessed (which means that your child?s teacher will spend most of the year testing and retesting to make sure everyone passes) and there will be no grade. It will be pass/fail. That vast pool of students who are the equivalent of general or foundation at standard grade will be lumped together. Those who might previously have scraped a 6 will now receive exactly the same grade as the students who worked hard and achieved a 3. This group, of course, are the very students who are likely to leave early and will need these qualifications to get jobs because they might not go on to get highers.

I hope all your children are destined to achieve great things academically. They?ll probably be fine (they usually are). The rest?well, I guess they?ll just have to take their chances as this is all worked out. You could always ask the education minister, Mr Russell, about this. His email is: [email protected]

Or you could write to him: Michael Russell MSP, The Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh, EH99 1SP

Or?why not give him a call on 0131 348 6326?

You could also contact Learning and Teaching Scotland on 0141 282 5000 or [email protected]

Or the SQA on 0845 279 1000 or [email protected]

That won?t get you anywhere useful but it is hilarious to listen to them squirm and mumble. Why not let us know how you get on?

AngusOg · 12/06/2011 15:21

Fantastic, thorough post, Justwannateach. Thank you. You really are superbly gifted with eloquence :)

If any parents would like to see what teachers have been dealing with, justwannateach loaded several spoof video clips on youtube, which sure as hell lifted the gloom for us all. Like all good satire, it cuts - but there is more than an element of truth in them:

is the first of them.
AngusOg · 12/06/2011 15:25

And for any confused journalist out there, why not just ask Justwannateach's permission to C&P the post? All the issues parents need to be aware of are there.

kaumana · 12/06/2011 15:55

The CFE is one of the main reasons my DS (P7) is going to a school which offers the IB as well. As he will be the second year to go through the new system I wanted to have a back up in case it goes all horribly wrong, which the more I read about it the more I think it will.

pointydog · 12/06/2011 16:56

Thanks for the big summary, justwanna.

It's all so complicated that I think there's also a huge concern that parents won't be able to - or won't be overly bothered to - get their heads around it in the short timescale that remains.

Most people on this thread are teachers.

There is no clear information for parents out there.

kaumana · 12/06/2011 17:05

pointydog you are bang on. My friends had no idea that the exams were changing and didn't believe me at first!

justwannateach - thanks for the summary, I think I'll have to read it a couple of times for it to make sense in my head.

headlikeasieve · 12/06/2011 17:46

I have been following this thread with interest and despair

justwannateach that's probably the best post I have ever seen on mumsnet! Thank you

My DD is to start S1 after the summer and like most people I had no idea any of this was going on and am deeply concerned about it. The problem with writing to the relevant people is what the hell do you say? I don't feel I have enough knowledge to make an argument about anything, perhaps this is their plan! I would go as far as to say I am afraid for my daughters education after reading this thread.

Perhaps someone more knowledgeable and organised than I am can take the lead and start some sort of movement or something we can all join

justwannateach · 12/06/2011 19:33

pointydog: There is no clear information for parents out there.

If it's any consolation (and I'm sure it isn't) there isn't any for teachers either. But at least when you ask for more information they might feel some obligation to answer you. When teachers ask they just roll their eyes at us and repeat that they're not going to lead us by the hand.

Jacaqueen · 12/06/2011 21:38

justwannateach thankyou so much for that well considered post.

I am not a teacher, but a parent of a child about to start in S3, who will thankfully still sit Standards and Highers. I do however have a child in primary.

I am involved with the Parent Council in both schools and have been trying to get across my concerns over the whole CofE debacle for some time.

If I may, I would like to use your post at the next Parent Council meeting.

pointydog · 12/06/2011 22:05

I'm a primary teacher, wanna. And I'm struggling to keep up with waht's happening in the secondaries.

mk3 · 12/06/2011 22:32

Another secondary school teacher here. At my school, we say CforE is like 'the Emperor's new clothes.' I really wish the media would pick this up. Ordinary teachers have absolutely no voice on this as far as I can see. Is there anything we can do as parents?

mustdash · 13/06/2011 20:08

I'm the OP, and badly want to do something about this, but am a bit out of my depth.

Justwanna, thank you for your post, it was great, and Angusog for the the link, which was excellent, I'll look for more later.

Have any of the opposition parties had anything to say about this? I can't believe they are just sitting back and letting this happen. Are any of the serious Scottish national papers (if they are still serious, or national) likely to be supportive? Surely the Parent Councils have a collective voice somewhere? I see there is a Forum of Parent Councils which is linked to LTS, but their out of date newsletter just parrots info from LTS - not the point really I'd have thought.

My DD is starting high school in a couple of months time, and I can't believe anyone in government thinks it is OK that there is no agreement between teachers and universities about what they are working towards.

Why is this taking so long, and more to the point, why are there no voices in the opposition, or media shouting about it? Is it because it always gets dragged back down in to the discussion about teachers pay and conditions? I'm not saying that there isn't a problem with that, but there are separate issues here that are being melded.

What should I do next? Actually, Justwanna, you've told me what I should do next. I think I'll also write to my local director of education, and msp.

Can anyone help me with wording an e-mail?

Thanks,

OP posts:
kaumana · 13/06/2011 20:40

mustdash - I think you are right in that the media are concentrating on pay and conditions at the moment and ignoring what the Senior school teachers are saying about the CfE.

IME - The majority of parents whose children will in the future be affected by the changes are currently in primary school and have no idea of what is in store re the exams.

I have a friend whose child is in S1 and just had a quick chat with her and she is just as confused and concerned.

I am going to a meeting at my DS school on Wednesday at which the future syllabus will be discussed.

AngusOg · 13/06/2011 21:09

Have any of the opposition parties had anything to say about this? I can't believe they are just sitting back and letting this happen. Are any of the serious Scottish national papers (if they are still serious, or national) likely to be supportive?

This is the bit I really don't get - when did Scots turn into sheep? Why has there been no public discourse on all of this? It seems as if the role of a teacher is being devalued to the point where their own academic achievements count for nothing and as for viewing them as professionals? Pah! What do we know - our lords and masters know better. After all, they went to school once. Cynical? Me?

WIs it because it always gets dragged back down in to the discussion about teachers pay and conditions? I'm not saying that there isn't a problem with that, but there are separate issues here that are being melded

Agreed. And when you do try to raise the matter, it is dismissed as 'moaning and complaining again'. See much earlier post in response to that particualr comment!

I think I'll also write to my local director of education, and msp.

Please, please do - and send a copy to the media?

Can anyone help me with wording an e-mail?

If no-one else can help, I can do so tomorrow, if you'd like. But being one of these lazy teachers, I'm bogged down with planning this evening.

(where's the pissed-off emoticon when you need it!)

justwannateach · 13/06/2011 23:42

Jacaqueen: You can use my post any way you want. I hope it is useful.

Pointydog: What is happening in secondary schools is that people are getting on with it as best they can. Mainly they are updating courses using the limited information that has been released. Nobody seems to know what will happen but...headteachers don?t have any answers because their director of education doesn?t have an answer because the minister of education doesn?t have an answer. So?we complain a bit, which makes no difference to anything, and then get on with our job as best we can.
Whenever we point out the problems with CfE the response is ?Teachers are moaning again?they are resistant to change?they are not prepared to adapt and need to move with the times.? That has all worked pretty well. Probably because that?s what the general public think of us anyway.

The current issue with teachers? pay and conditions is a separate issue but there is a similar narrative: ?Look at their holidays?short days?outdated working practices?have to do their fair share?they?re not special?who do they think they are?? etc. Conditions and pay were recently cut and many EIS members felt their union didn?t fight for their interests strongly enough. In July there will be a wider review of teachers? conditions. Submissions to that review have leaking and they do not look good for teachers which is what you have seen in the news.

I think very little will happen to improve the implementation of CfE as it is not in the interest of anyone involved (except teachers and parents of course).

The unions: Main teaching union is the EIS (much larger than the SSTA which is only for secondary teachers). The EIS have been on the CfE management board throughout this whole process and have generally been positive regarding CfE. I am told by some that primary teachers have less of a problem with CfE than secondary, mainly because it is better than what they had before (but you?d have to ask them whether that?s true).
Expecting the EIS to turn around and attack the principles of CfE now is slightly unrealistic. That said, the EIS at their recent conference voted to ballot members on boycotting CfE but the ballot won?t be held until November and I personally don?t see it making much difference: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-13729147

Since May 2010 the SSTA have been criticising CfE and in about October 2010 were kicked off the management board after threatening industrial action.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8665793.stm
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-10985845

Political parties: Labour started this whole thing before the SNP took power the last time so any attack on it is likely to be limited to ?You aren?t doing this properly and are hence ruining CfE? rather than ?Stop CfE immediately?

The SNP pursued CfE even after the demotion of Fiona Hyslop, the last education minister. They could have ditched large portions of it then but didn?t. Mike Russell has consistently defended CfE and the government?s handling of all.

Other organisations include?

LTS: Responsible for CfE and in my opinion a significant contender for the most hopeless, hapless, incompetent organisation ever to have existed in the history of the Planet Earth. Never has so little been produced by so many for so long. LTS employed large numbers of teachers, taken out of schools on short term contracts, rotating them after a couple of years after having produced very little. LTS is now being ?merged? with Her Majesty?s Inspectorate, has apparently been stripped to a shadow its former self and the teachers have been allowed to return to their schools.

SQA/HMI: They have been supportive of CfE. If I were a more cynical person I might say that they saw there wouldn?t be room for three big organisations in future and were keen not to be the one that was axed. If that was their strategy it worked. LTS is going. SQA are busy writing assessments to fit with CfE, even though they can?t fit with CfE, and generally seem to be doing a good impression of Pontius Pilate whenever they are questioned. HMI are cheerfully inspecting schools, making sure they are preparing for CfE properly although they don?t seem to have any more of an idea what that means than we do (although good luck ever getting them to admit that).

So?there really isn?t anyone who will help as far as I can see. But that?s just my opinion.