I thought I would document my response to the national debate on Scottish education. To be honest I had hoped to be able to make a more detailed response but as always, the time to think and discuss is never as much as one would like.
To encourage others to make a contribution we have run two IoP sessions where some of these ideas have been discussed. I have also been inspired to post by Mr Cochrane’s blog. The National Conversation* (cochrane1964.wixsite.com)
1. What kind of education will be needed by children and young people in Scotland in the future?
We need an evidence informed education system. Too many Scottish policy documents lack any references to educational research, educational researchers and experts within the Scottish system are also ignored. We rarely seem to invite research to improve. For example, the reading system used in Scotland lacks robust evidence compared to other systems available. We have more children arriving in secondary schools that have poor literacy and numeracy skills, this needs to improve to allow them to access the curriculum and be successful learners.
We do not have a curriculum, curriculum for excellence is insufficiently defined and pedagogically questionable as a list of experiences and outcomes. It lacks specification on what precisely learners are expected to be able to know and do. We should have a curriculum that is more coherent and states the big ideas that children should know and do. There should be freedom for pedagogical approaches but what is required should be much more explicit. Wynne Harlen approach for big ideas in science might be one that is taken. Students should learn less but learn it better and there should be better progression pathways. The senior phase curriculum lacks articulation at present between levels and was perversely designed in this manner especially at levels 4 and 5.
Children should be assessed through sampling during their learning, and we should recognise achievement in and out of class. Some assessments could be sat digitally by students as and when they wish and as often as required to show competency as is done in a driving theory test. I would remove S4 exams freeing up time for more learning and only assess on exit of school with graded assessments being optional. Qualifications could be criterion referenced rather than norm referenced. Pass levels could articulate with colleges and universities to allow for progression and next steps in learning.
We should look at arranging the school day into formal activities in the morning and activities sport, competitions, hobbies, socialisation, wellbeing in the afternoon. There could also be changes to the time of the school day to reflect the challenges of teenagers in the morning.
2. How do we make that a reality?
A coherent, progressive curriculum should be structured by curriculum experts. The details should be designed by subject experts and provided to teachers. It should not be left to individual teachers to invent the curriculum, the cost of centrally developed materials will be more than offset compared to the costs of teachers in every school doing the same job. Then teachers can adapt to suit their local schools and learners.
Assessments should be trialled and tested before implementation and have feedback to allow teacher comments and improvement, in the past SQA unit assessments contained issues that were slow or never to be corrected.
Courses within schools should be time costed and include timings, at present the times don’t reflect what is actually needed and no times are on many senior phase courses.
Documentation from educational bodies should include proper change logs to make it explicitly clear what has changed from a previous version, too many times i have needed to compare PDF files for changes due to the lack of explicit detail.
Teachers need more time for preparation of learning and professional development. International survey show we have more contact time than many other educational systems.
Schools are being asked to deal with wider societal issues so they need to operate with more partnerships with other agencies, schools might need on site social workers, nurses, psychologists.
The school inspection system should change significantly. HGIOS has very few references to learning and teaching and far too many other things in it. We need an improved clarity of focus as advocated by Bruce Robertson. Things that are measured are valued and this is skewing what is done in schools. Personally, I would scrap the entire inspection system and have schools work with each other and review each other as critical friends to offer support and challenge.
There should be a regular review, every 5 years or so, of the curriculum and how it is progressing and what changes might be needed.
Teachers should have genuine agency to make choices and be able to articulate concerns without being seen as being problematic or a nuisance.
We need greater acknowledgement that subject expertise matters, and that subject knowledge, pedagogy and pedagogical content knowledge is important.
3. How can every child and young person’s individual needs be supported and addressed in the future?
We need to recognise that whilst each young person is an individual it is not possible for us to offer an individualised education for each young person. This will never be affordable. What can be done is we can have a coherent knowledge-based curriculum that has clear progression pathways in both academic and vocation routes. We can support and value staff in their jobs and provide accommodation, facilities and resources to help them support the young people in their care. Improved technology might help support some learners in the classroom, availability of IT within schools remains very varied and is older and has less functionality that many workplaces.
4. What is one thing that needs to stay and why?
We need to change not just rearrange the educational system. This includes the recommendations from the Muir report that have already been ignored by the government. The recommendations of the Muir report and the OECD have highlighted issues effectively.
That the Scottish teaching system is a graduate profession with subject expertise is good. Expertise and a well-educated profession is needed to effectively implement change. The policy of teacher agency pursued by the DFM is good but on the ground in the classroom and schools more trust is needed to let us do the job.
5. What are the most important priorities for a future Scottish education system?
A coherent knowledge-based curriculum that has clear progression pathways in both academic and vocation routes.
Enable teachers to develop better by reducing their classroom contact time and supporting professional learning.
Use of evidence and research to inform change and practice with details and references in every policy document that underpins the system. Less educational jargon, documentation should be clear to all.
The educational bodies within Scottish education should enhance and support the subject specialism networks and embrace the expertise.
6. How can we ensure that everyone involved in education in Scotland has a say in future decisions and actions?
Build in the consultation process ask COSLA and schools to include sessions on consultation in INSET days. Have a National Curriculum Review Body. Include more people working in schools in the consultations and management boards of any consultation. Too many similar faces in similar roles that move from one organisation to the other.
7. How can children and young people be cared for and supported in the future? (i.e. physical and mental wellbeing)
Ensure curriculum is coherent, progressive and resourced.
Change the assessment system to reduce unnecessary assessment points, offer more resit opportunities.
Change the school day to include more nurture, play, hobbies and socialisation.
Progressive pathways in academic and vocational curriculum. There are concerning shortages in teachers in certain subjects (technologies for example) which them leads schools to no longer offer such a curriculum. Senior phase courses need to articulate better between them, bi-course teaching needs to stop by designing courses correctly in the first place. The two term dashes of National 5 and Higher do not support the wellbeing of our young people.
8. How can the right of every child and young person to have opportunities to develop their full potential be achieved in future?
Resourcing, coherence, proportionate assessments and appropriate time allocated for courses.
Supporting and valuing teachers in schools, giving them time to prepare and professionally develop. learners learn more effectively from teachers who feel valued, are calmer and less stressed and have more time to be prepared.
9. How can children and young people be helped to learn about our changing world, so they feel able to positively contribute?
Provide them with knowledge, allow them to achieve and develop confidence through success. Challenge them and support their failure to help develop resilience. Recognise that skills come through the foundation of knowledge, and some are domain specific. Teaching them how to learn and how the brain works can then aid them to specialise and continue to learn throughout life.
10. Do you have any other comments that you would like to provide about a vision for the future of Scottish Education?
I do feel it would have been better to have more sessions for teachers to discussion with other teachers and shape the discussion. National time allocated would have helped this. I can only feel that there will be fewer returns that there should if my school is a reflection of the national picture. This is a missed opportunity.
