To anyone reading some recent literature, it would not be surprising to conclude that Scottish education is undergoing some kind of crisis of confidence. For starters, there is the long running debate over the Curriculum for Excellence. Launched in 2004, it has become mired, becalmed and rudderless after countless assaults on its integrity. Consultation with stakeholders seems only to have confused matters and the relationship between curriculum and national exams remains hazy. Parallel to, but not synomous with ACfE, is the whole notion of Assessment for Learning, one of the more intellectually sound ideas of the last 10 years. Yet how can we negotiate the switch from formative assessment, with its emphasis on feedback and personalised learning, to an assessment regime based on end of year summative exams-Highers and Advanced Highers. Exams need percentages and grades, anthema to formative assessment. Added to this we have the Scottish Baccalaureate, about which there are various opinions, ranging from the optimistic to the carping. Certainly UCAS has recognised the value of the interdisciplinary project, allocating it the equivalent of half an Advanced Higher. Howver, there remain concerns about the capacity of many schools to deliver the new qualification, with the Times reporting that Just 22 schools out of 376 will offer the baccalaureate after the summer. It has been derided as “an exam for leafy suburbs.”
Letter after letter in the newspapers attests to continuing teacher discomfort, concern or cynicism aboy the whole adventure, One correspondant writes that,
“Curriculum for Excellence is an unproven ideology dressed up in glossy jargonised techno-speak, driven forward by an unelected quangocracy. The heart of CFE is a distillation of all the trendy, liberal thinking that has dominated education since the Sixties – “child-centred learning”, learning must be fun, learning must be relevant etc.”
while the Government retorts that ACE is the “biggest reform of our education system in a generation”.
Now we have a damming critique by respected educational guru (well maybe, less respected all of a sudden), Keir Bloomer, who argues that ACE has lost its direction and the big picture. His views are noted and rejected, but the letters and comments tell a different story. Many teachers share his concerns-they think ACE ill thought out, being different things to different people, or, worse, all things to all men. Bloomer argues that ACE has no vision; it has become caught up in incrementalism and jargon, overwhelmed by its own ring-bound weight of schemes and programmes and capacities.
Chris Woodhead has recently described ACE as a curriculum for ignorance; he points out that “Tens of thousands of children are failing to master basic literacy and numeracy by the age of 14. In some areas, in half of the schools, the majority of the children are failing to achieve minimum standards of literacy and numeracy”, and does on to say that, “In up to a third of schools in some parts of Scotland, most primary pupils are failing to achieve the benchmark standard in writing by P7. One in six pupils leaves primary school unable to read, write or add up.”
Meanwhile, writing in the Times Educational Supplement, Prof Lindsay Paterson debunks the default mode that Scottish education is the best in the world. Reluctantly, after surveying the evidence, he deduces that, ..”the essential point is that attainment in England has improved much more than in the other three nations. That is true in primary, as shown last year by the Timss (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study). It is true of attainment at GCSE or equivalent. And it is true of progression rates into higher education. Wales and Scotland have got a bit better. Northern Ireland, with its selective system, has bested these two and remains ahead of England, although it has not improved as much.”
All along Paterson has poured cold water on ACE, troubled that it lacks the rigour associated with traditional academic disciplines; being too dependent on a projecting culture of interdiscipinary projects rather than emphasing the hard slog which constitutes much learning. And following on from a dismal report on basic literacy and numeracy, Nick Seaton of pressure group Campaign for Real Eduction, said,
“the Scottish education system was coming apart at the seams. “In a few years these young people will be looking for jobs. It is obvious that they will be no use to employers.”
HMIe, in a report entitled Learning Together; Lessons in School Improvement, note that follow through action by HMIe was required in 1/3 of secondary schools. This means that these schools had serious defects in major aspects of their work; often in leadership and self evaluation. While acknowledging many strengths in Scottish education, the report ends with a warning that,
“the system also faces challenges arising from significant longstanding problems and the general need
for further and faster improvement. These challenges include raising standards across the board, particularly in literacy, numeracy and science, and providing better support for the substantial numbers of children and young people from vulnerable groups or disadvantaged backgrounds.”
