IT MIGHT be that Jock Tamson's future bairns will look back on the creation of the Curriculum for Excellence, with its associated new exams, as a great step forward in our education system.
There are some who say that's a bit like saying transport experts will one day look back at the fantastic network of trams running all over the capital as a great turning point in that city's history.
We are trapped in the perspective of the present, and from here there are some aspects that do not look good in our grand educational experiment to equip our young citizens not just with the skills they need for the world of today, but the ability to continue learning the skills they will will need in the future.
Last year the Scottish Qualifications Authority was forced to seek a £2 million bail-out to cover the cost of the National 4 and National 5 exams and this year has seen the new Highers come on stream. The SQA was given a further £14 million this year but still finds itself asking for yet another £5 million.
Small wonder that political critics are making hay, but they should be wary because the whole CfE project goes back deep into the heart of the time when Labour and the Liberal Democrats were in Government.
The real problem with the new curriculum has been two-fold. First it was envisaged, worthily, as creating a brave, bottom-up world of curriculum creation, giving creative whizz-kid teachers the chance to develop their own ideas.
But when it began to get to the crucial delivery phase the teachers who had welcomed this, in theory, began to demand additional support and above all, direction because so little had been given. "Grappling with mist" was the phrase of the day.
In other words, well-meaning bottom-up became top-down. When all of this resulted in teachers being unprepared Michael Russell became caught in the middle of an emerging political spat as Education Secretary trying to square the circle.
But in truth the main teaching union, the Educational Institute of Scotland, was right when it said that too much of the new system remained too vague on the eve of launch. The teachers were not ready, their support was not yet in place, there was a requirement for more training and all of this was had to be put in place under the maxim of better late than never.
The SQA demand for fresh help of £5m simply reflects the ongoing actions which need to be taken to service these legitimate needs. Of course, the concern remains that £2m last year and £5m this year might mean £10m next year, but this once our new exam system is bedded down these figure should fall.
A number of questions arise. Is it fair to call this a debacle? No. It was a legitimate and well-meaning reform to our education system, agreed across party lines, to prepare our young citizens to make them adaptable for an uncertain future. Paying a little extra to make it work is the right thing to do.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article