A NATIONAL audit to find out if Scottish schools are ready to introduce controversial new exams is failing to talk to the people who really know, teachers' leaders have warned.
According to a poll by a teaching union, more than half of the country's 32 councils have not asked senior subject teachers for their views on the qualifications.
The Scottish Secondary Teachers Association (SSTA) survey found only six councils – Fife, East Dunbartonshire, East Lothian, Highland, Inverclyde and Moray – were seeking information directly from principal teachers. The remainder were either asking headteachers or conducting the audit at council level with education officials.
The audit is crucial because it will inform the Scottish Government of the readiness of schools to deliver National 4 and National 5 exams, which replace Standard Grades and Intermediates.
Some 54,000 pupils in S2 will be sitting the first National exams in 2013/14, but there has been long-standing concern over whether schools will be ready.
East Renfrewshire, the country's top-performing education authority, and a number of leading private schools, have decided to delay for a year because of concerns over readiness.
The Scottish Government has provided a £3.5 million package aimed at extending support for schools that need extra help.
Highlighting where that help is needed is a key part of the national audit, led by the Education Scotland quango.
Ann Ballinger, general secretary of the SSTA, said: "I would like to congratulate those councils who have had the courage and foresight to invite comments from their teachers.
"However, it is deeply disturbing so many authoritiesare not asking the experts what is happening in their classrooms. We had hoped the deep audit would have been conducted in a way that the Scottish Government would have had a clear picture of the situation.
"Unfortunately, this is a wasted opportunity and any decision to go ahead based on this is bound to be deeply flawed.
"It is quite clear that many councils are conducting their audit within the education department and not consulting teachers or headteachers at all and that is deeply worrying."
The Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) teaching union said that, under the terms of the recent support package, issues over the audit could be raised directly with Education Scotland.
Larry Flanagan, EIS general secretary, said: "We are pro-actively seeking feedback from schools under the terms of the agreement and, where teacher views are being sidelined, we have a right to raise matters directly with Education Scotland.
"The terms of the agreement were framed to allow the voice of the profession to be heard, so any attempt to circumvent that circumstance will be challenged by the EIS."
Mark Priestly, reader in education at Stirling University and the author of a recent report on the Curriculum for Excellence, said a more independent audit would have been preferable.
"It is being done by Education Scotland and it worries me that evaluation by a Government body is not fully independent," he said.
"There is a sense that highlighting problems marks people out as a failure and if the evaluation is being done by the school inspectorate there is a conflict of interest there."
Dr Bill Maxwell, chief executive of Education Scotland, said: "As part of our audit, we have discussed a range of issues relating to preparedness for the new national qualifications with schools and local authorities.
"As we have previously made clear, we would welcome SSTA's formal contribution. If it lets us know which teachers or schools require discussion with Education Scotland, we will be pleased to follow up."
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